I don't know why I have never posted this before but it's about time it was aired properly... This took place on the morning of 21st September 2007.

...The mother gave birth in West Yorkshire, and was frightened that Social Services were going to steal her baby illegally without a court order, so discharged herself from hospital (with doctors' consent).

She was brought to our house in Worcestershire for safety, arriving at ten at night. It was our intention to apply for an Emergency Protection Order (to protect the child from Social Services) the following morning.

At about six am West Mercia Police arrived in force and stated that they wanted to search the property. I asked for a warrant, they replied, "We don't need one," before breaking down the door and forcing entry. There were no social workers or medics in attendance. There was NO search warrant, NO court order and NO police protection order. The recording starts soon after this point.

They took our mobile phones, as well as computers and case paperwork which were subject to both legal and parliamentary privilege, not to mention my daughter’s laptop which contained all her GCSE coursework. We didn’t see any of them again for almost a year.

They actually forgot to arrest my wife, Julie, and dragged her off to the police station without ever reading her rights or telling her why she was being detained.

Julie, the mother and I were all locked up for some thirty one hours and interrogated by the West Yorkshire Homicide and Serious Crime Squad.

Upon release, we were put on police bail by West Yorkshire police with no clear indication of what crime was alleged. We were repeatedly re-bailed for almost a year until we commenced Judicial Review proceedings for excessive bail, whereupon they dropped the case immediately, and our property was returned not long afterwards.

At the time of detention I had asked to make complaints, and was told that no complaints could be made “until the investigation was complete”. A year later, after the “investigation“ was completed and we were released from bail, we tried to make complaints of such police actions as trespass, illegal entry, illegal search & seizure, wrongful arrest and KIDNAP, but were told that since more than twelve months had elapsed since the original incident that our complaints would not be investigated. We have made multiple complaints, none of which has been successful.

Eventually, we went to the Worcester News with our story. A reporter wrote up the story and emailed it to me to be reviewed for accuracy. We expected a front page within a few days at the most. After a week we asked why they weren’t publishing, and were told that they were waiting for a comment from the Police. Time passed and after a few more weeks I phoned and asked to speak to the Editor about what was happening. When I finally got to speak to him, he just said rather curtly, “It’s up to me what I publish in my paper”, which distinctly gave me the impression that it very much wasn’t.

comma berenices

21-07-2010, 04:08 PM

Is this the lady who's grandaughters were snatched by the stasi?.

They are trying to silence her by imposing the ban,will just make her all the more determined.In doing so they just proved their guilt.

That audio is very disturbing,if any parent thinks their children are safe think again.

ms hope

21-07-2010, 05:16 PM

Is this the lady who's grandaughters were snatched by the stasi?.

They are trying to silence her by imposing the ban,will just make her all the more determined.In doing so they just proved their guilt.

That audio is very disturbing,if any parent thinks their children are safe think again.

They have definitely proved their guilt; I wonder why David Cameron did nothing surely he must have known, they cant blame this one on Labour when most local authorities are Conservative controlled, looks like they are all in bed together :rolleyes:

A serving Borough Councillor who is prepared to raise her own grandchildren, being denied , so the state can generate money from Forced Adoption.

It would seem that this practice of 'child stealing' is a nationwide occurrence. I have (and still am) going through exactly the same thing regarding my own grandchildren who were taken from their family six years ago and have now been split up and adopted.

I won't go into too many details at the moment, suffice to say that the children were not in danger of significant harm from any member of the family. Lincolnshire County Council adopted the same practices as the above mentioned.

I (as their maternal grandmother) made a request to become a party to the proceedings, but this request was denied, even though I had looked after them for over three years.

I do not have a criminal record and have successfully brought up a family of five children myself. My eldest grand- children who at the time were aged nine and seven, made it clear that they wanted to live with me, but their request was ignored.

I was lied to by (the many changing) social workers, who told me that the children had said they did not want to live with me.

Contact was granted to me for two hours, once a month, in an obscure location, which meant I had to catch three different trains in order to get there, but I did it. Contact was supervised by someone who sat making notes in a corner and if my grand-daughter needed the toilet, we were accompanied to the toilet because they obviously thought I was going to harm her in some way! My seven year old grand daughter told me that it was because they thought I would steal her! Who put this information in her head?

The children were eventually put up for adoption against my wishes, but I had no say in it, as I am only their grandmother. The two youngest went first - to a couple who promised to write through the letterbox system, but have not honoured their promise. The eldest two were placed with foster carers and then moved to a couple who adopted them. The social worker told me that she would only allow the children to be released to the couple if they were to agree to an open adoption, as it would cause the children significant harm to have no contact with me and their natural family.

Again I told the social services that I wanted to look after them myself, and I was told I should ask for an assessment, which I did, but the assessor never turned up. when I rang and enquired I was told again that the children did not want to live with me.

The adopters have not honoured the agreement, refusing all direct contact, even though the children (now aged 16 and 13) have made repeated requests to see me. I have made contact with the children myself, as I found out where they were living, and they were overjoyed to be back in touch with us. My grand-daughter has sent me an email telling me how much she loves me and that she never wanted to go anywhere other than back to me, and my grandson has told me that before we made contact she tried to run away three times.

Since then, the adopters have found out, and have now put a block on the social networking site and intercept their emails. They have also taken their mobile phones from them, and forbidden them to speak to us. I'm sure that once the dust has settled they will be in touch with me again though, as they are clearly unhappy where they are. It is frustrating because I'm powerless against these people who shouldn't have been given the children in the first place.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks.
Lucy

mark1963

24-07-2010, 03:20 PM

This is what I received off of Whatdotheyknow.

Any comment?:

Hi Mark

Despite many warnings and emaisl to try to encourage a positive change
in behaviour, Sheena was banned for the following reasons:

(i) repeatedly posting annotations that broke our moderation policy
(eg spam links, or information not related to the FOI request)
(ii) registering multiple identities (just under 50 accounts) on the
site to give an appearance of support for her campaign ("sock puppet
accounts")
(iii) repeatedly posting defamatory / libellous material, and personal
information of third parties
(iv) repeatedly trying to register new accounts on the site to bypass
an earlier ban

We have offered to discuss with her a lifting of the ban should she
wish to co-operate with the site's policies, but she has not taken us
up on this.

Our guidance for users on behaviour can be found here:
<<http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/help/about#focused> (http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/help/about#focused)>
<<http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/help/about#moderation> (http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/help/about#moderation)>

We will soon be changing the site to enable us to publically give
reasons for bans. In the last 3 years we have only had to take this
action of last resort for 12 people out of 12,000 registered users.

Kind regards
Alex - WhatDoTheyKnow.com volunteer

ms hope

25-07-2010, 12:08 AM

This is what I received off of Whatdotheyknow.

Any comment?:

Well done Mark :)

Obviously the whatdotheyknow team have no problem discussing people's accounts already, so why bother saying they are going to change it at a later date in order to give the reasons for a ban:rolleyes:

She's been doing something right in at least trying to wake up the public to what is happening, probably trod on too many toes :)

What we need is for hundreds if not thousands of people to start asking the exact same questions then they wont be able to ignore them;)

ms hope

25-07-2010, 12:31 AM

I do hope the whatdotheyknowteam get to watch this and ask themselves the question is it right ;)

David Icke-The Greatest Speech for Humanity-V for Vendetta-Directors cut
David Icke-The Greatest Speech for Humanity-V for Vendetta-Directors cut - YouTube

ms hope

25-07-2010, 01:19 AM

A JUDICIAL REVIEW
the true incompetence of the family courts

http://ajudicialreview.blogspot.com/

Saturday, July 24, 2010

Urgent Viral Release

‘Grandparents Apart Wales’ a group
that is dedicated to the welfare of children being reunited with their
grandparents is to be silenced or else.

The group have been reporting on a
case about social services having failed yet again and have received a letter
from a head of children’s services telling them to remove the story or face
legal proceedings.

They campaign for grandparents via
The Charter for Grandchildren to be first in line to care for
children when they need to go into care.

'Mind his own business' when a mother came to him about her son, later to be found in a ‘care home ‘attached to a Labour councillor, where children were being sexually abused.

ms hope

25-07-2010, 04:59 PM

This is what I received off of Whatdotheyknow.

Any comment?:

Just a thought

Why dont they take her to court, is it because it would be in an open court
and the 'real' press could attend, are they scared that too many people would find out the truth about what they have been up to?

I am sure Bill Maloney amongst others would be very interested in attending;)

Look what we have here : Kent Common Purpose Advisory Board :rolleyes:

Chris Stone

Personal Chaplaina and Media
Advisor to the Bishopo of
Rochester

The Church of England Diocese
of Rochester

http://www.cpexposed.com/documents/CP_AdvisoryGroup_Kent.pdf

Quote: The advisory groups in Kent play an important part, not only in the selection of participants for the different programs, but also in guiding the work that we do and playing “ambassadorial” role for Common Purpose in their day to day role.

ms hope

03-08-2010, 08:53 PM

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-10848645

Child abuse failures criticised

Most grandparents don't get a look in or a chance to raise their
grandchildren especially if they are not told before social services
take them :(

ms hope

06-08-2010, 01:27 AM

Children being stolen on the one hand for forced adoptions, whilst preventable abuse is ignored, with no one made accountable for their actions - sound about right :rolleyes:

4 August 2010
Dear Kent County Council,

Hang your head(s) in shame

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/kent/...

'Not listened to'
The relative, who asked to remain anonymous, told the BBC he had
contacted social services on two occasions to warn them that
Sellman's partner was expecting a child.

He said: "I feel the information I passed on was not listened to.
"If they had done more checks on the computer, they may have found
something out. Maybe the baby would have been better looked after."
Within 25 days of her being born prematurely, Tiffany suffered a
fractured skull and died in hospital after being left in her
father's care.

The taxpayer picked up the tab for a meal hosted by county council chiefs at an exclusive London restaurant that cost nearly £360, an investigation by the KM Group has found.

The dinner took place at Rules restaurant in Covent Garden in the heart of London in January.

It was charged to the chief executive’s credit card as official council business.

Details of the meal have come to light following an examination of receipts and expenses charged on county council credit cards between 2009-2010.
While all the claims were cleared under the authority’s rules, the previously unpublished details of the meal are bound to raise eyebrows.
The evening dinner at Rules took place barely a fortnight after KCC announced its budget and a pay freeze for thousands of staff.

A claim sheet submitted by former chief executive Peter Gilroy described it as a "working dinner with government consultants" to discuss Total Place – a government initiative encouraging councils and others to cut costs by sharing assets.

It was attended by Mr Gilroy, council leader Paul Carter and David Lewis, the council’s head of corporate property. The two guests were the chairman of the Kent Property Board, Jonathan Harris and Tim Campbell, of Tim Campbell Associates.

The group enjoyed a meal that included foie gras terrine, native oysters, loin of deer, sirloin steak and a rack of lamb.
Two bottles of wine – one that cost £39.50 - accompanied the meal. KCC says that the council leader had since paid £15 towards the costs of the wine.

Our examination of claims has also uncovered:

· A trip to Edinburgh Film Festival involving an overnight stay in a five-star hotel that cost more than £800

· A business breakfast at Maidstone’s Hilton hotel – barely two miles from County Hall - between the chief constable and chief executive costing £47.85

· A number of other restaurant meals variously described as "working lunches" or "working suppers."
In response to questions we asked about the claims, KCC said in a statement that there were valid reasons for all.

Asked why Rules was chosen rather than somewhere cheaper, or at County Hall, KCC said: "The chairman [of the property board] has travelled to numerous board meetings in Kent and on this occasion, central London was chosen as the appropriate venue."
Discussions at the dinner focused on "what was needed to be done to unlock value in the public property both in Kent and across the country".

The visit last July to the Edinburgh Film Festival by chief executive and deputy county council leader Alex King was to celebrate the nomination of a film "The Calling" for an award.

KCC contributed £75,000 to the film.
The pair stayed overnight at the five-star Sheraton Hotel at a cost of £270 while flights with BA cost £438.

KCC said: "They attended because, in light of the award, it was considered important to launch the Film Development Fund at such a prestigious event, maximising Kent’s profile to the filming industry."
Cheaper flights were considered but "availability and timings proved difficult" because of other commitments.
The Sheraton Hotel was booked as "it was the closest to the other venues visited and limited the cost of travelling".

Asked why the chief executive and chief constable met for breakfast at a hotel, the council said: "This was an early meeting at 7.30am.
"The venue was chosen as somewhere that would enable the Chief Constable to get straight on the motorway to get to his next appointment."
The pair, along with Tanya Oliver, KCC’s director of public access, discussed the KCC film bill and various child protection issues in Thanet.

Speaking today, council leader Paul Carter said: "The costs came out at about £40 or £50 a head.
"We could have booked a business room and held a meeting and probably spent more than we did.

"The two guests had done an enormous amount of work for the county council free of charge and occasionally it is appropriate to reward people who have given their time freely."
He went on to say that he had paid for all the wine out of his own pocket, although that appeared to contradict a statement provided by KCC said he had contributed £15 of the drinks bill.

"Quite what the purpose of this dinner was, I do not know.
"I do not think there can be any justification for a meal that cost £360 and was charged to the taxpayer.
"It's not as if central London is short of cheaper places to eat.
"There are a lot of unanswered questions, not least what rules KCC has to ensure that when credit cards are used, we get the best value for money."

Comments make interesting reading as well ;

KCC Officer wrote:

This is bad but the really corrupt people in KCC are the senior managers who have been there for years and who, for years, have spent tax payers money purely to further their own careers. David Cockburn - ex Interim Chief Exec - is a classic case in point: what exactly has he ever achieved for the millions he costs us. I work for KCC, I see the way he and his clique behave and the money they waste (without any challenge from his mate Paul Carter who seems to like the junkets and 'intiatives') and it just makes my stomach churn.

06 Aug 2010 5:26 PM

Kay McLoughlin wrote:

Ok let me just clarify this... it was a 'working dinner' to 'cut costs' and 'a government initiative'?

The dinner guests were from the private sector, and the advantage of doing business with KCC would be of financial benefit to them yet KCC, i.e. the taxpayer footed the bill?

Although saying that they were from the private sector I could only find Tim Campbell's details and company but can find no record of Jonathan Harris, Chairman of the Kent Property Board.

Is this a fictional person, chairman of a fictional board to justify the cost of the dinner?

An answer to this question would be appreciated as I would like to be able to google someone who can be a guest at such a dinner and hope to get a result.

As for some of the hotel bills have these people not heard of Travelodge or Premier Inn?

Yet another example of overpaid bureaucrats spending taxpayers money how they see fit with no justification for their actions.

06 Aug 2010 9:33 AM

ms hope

10-08-2010, 02:40 PM

How many more councillors from any party (former or current) or MP's bothered to attend :rolleyes:

There could have been few more bizarre meetings anywhere in Britain last week than that between a married mother and the social workers who had taken her six young children to place them unhappily in foster care. The officials, of a council I cannot name, are fixated with the idea that this respectable Christian is a "sex worker", whose children all have different fathers and who is engaged in "child trafficking".

They appear to have no evidence for these charges other than the hearsay surmising of a single "witness". I gather that the social workers had reluctantly agreed to commission DNA testing of parents and children, to establish whether they were all from the same father. But even now, I am told, the social workers are refusing to disclose the test results.

The mother, accompanied to this surreal interrogation by a nun who had known her for years, insisted that she had only slept with one man in her life, her husband, the father of her children. She went on to ask one of the social workers how many men she had slept with. The reply was that this was a private matter.

Perhaps we are not very far here from those extraordinary cases some 20 years ago when children were torn away from their families wholesale because social workers had concocted a fantasy that they were being abused in weird satanic rituals (a story I told in my book Scared To Death).
It is vitally important that when this case again comes before the courts, the judge should put the council's supposed evidence to very careful test.

I look forward to being able to report in due course that this horrible farce has been brought to an end and that the distraught parents have been reunited with their children.

Many have commented on this 'extremely short' article including:

Ian Josephs who happens to be a Ex Conservative Kent County Councillor :)
who always tells it exactly like it is, now where have we heard all this before :rolleyes:

NO witnesses,No witnesses ,No witnesses called !
Only hearsay,hearsay,hearsay, !

Where else but in the family courts can a barrister read out the hearsay evidence as though it's gospel and cannot then be questioned ?
Worse still the mother is GAGGED ! GAGGED ! GAGGED ! so both she and Christopher Booker have been legally threatened for saying even this much !
What happened to free speech?What happened to innocent until proved guilty? What happened to human rights?

4 court cases and the only person to give evidence was the mother !
In each hearing the counsel for the local authority read out a lot of allegations from a sheaf of papers which was in itself purely hearsay from social workers who claimed they had received allegations that they believed to be true !! A sort of hearsay of hearsay with the barrister giving evidence without being sworn in and being believed rather than the mother! She contrary to the human rights act had no opportunity to cross examine witnesses because none ever turned up !

A sad farce in, believe it or not a British family court ! Racism and anti christianity at its worst with social workers and even the judge unable to believe that a black clergywoman could make a living writing and that she must therefore be on the game !Her character witness (a nun!) was ordered out of court without being allowed to testify ! Her books and tapes written by her on religious subjects were ignored and refused to be received in evidence!

Meanwhile a newborn baby snatched by force at 3.30am whilst still breastfeeding misses her mother as do her 5 siblings who are begging to go home ! Injuries inflicted on one of the girls whilst in fostercare were dismissed as "she fell over".So much for ss care !

Is it all a conspiracy? No nothing so dramatic ! It's simply that social workers individually will never never admit they were wrong !Like limpets they cling to their first theory no matter what subsequent evidence emerges to disprove it !

More than 99% of applications for care orders succeed so what hope does a black preacher lady have against such a diabolical system?? :mad:

Then how many adoptions then please. I know of least five families,
that was "forced". NO CONSENT. Against there wishes
you better reconsider your answer. Not good to be fobbed off by
denying about a very emotive subject to MANY famleys. So what's the
answer and the TRUTH please

A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is
available on the Internet at this address:
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/ad...

Please clarify from what period Amanda Barden (Guardian) worked
within Kent County Council prior to becoming a Guardian and which
position's were held.

"Prior to joining Cafcass Amanda Barden worked as a Social worker,
Senior Practitioner and Acting Team Manager within Kent County
Council between July 1998 and November 2004."

-------

Can you please explain why an ex-employee of an Local Authority
such a Kent, can be appointed within the same Kent Family Courts,
without it being considered a gross conflict of interest.

Are the Family Courts within this Authority aware of Amanda Bardens
previous employment history and who within the Court is responsible
for appointing the Guardian.

Please also state how many times she has been appointed as a
Guardian by the Kent Family Courts;i.e. name individual
Courts such as Medway, Maidstone,Dover etc relating to Kent County
Council 'child care proceedings'.

On how many of these occasions the children have been placed for
adoption or special guardianship placements rather than with
relatives/or returned to their parents.

Families could rightly feel aggrieved that this has not been made
clear to them
and that the Council and Cafcass could be considered to be working
inconjunction and not appear to be working in their
childrens best interests.

It is paramount that CAFCASS is transparent in all its dealing
with other peoples children, as there could be very serious
consequences.”

Yours faithfully,

Mr Brian Gerrish

C. Smith-Byrne left an annotation (6 August 2010)

This woman no longer works for Cafcass and has either been sacked or finally left after realising that she would not get much further as of Spring 2010. No doubt other failures will follow into her now vacant footprints!

Could you please tell me for which employer this lady worked prior
to joining the Cafcass South East region, whether she has been
employed by a county council in the past and which positions were
held?

What type of training in child protection and domestic abuse did Ms Clark receive and which body provided this training for how long
and how long ago?

The L.A has the upper hand over parents. YES?. The parents SHARE
parental responsblty of there child WITH THE L.A. Therefore should
the L.A decide that adoption's the best choice the parent does not
have NO power over that L.A. Even with the best "legal
representation" on the land. Not many people have WON over any L.A.
So whether they agree to adoption or not won't matter. Then that
has become "forced adoption". So please release those numbers of
ALL the adoptions.

Yours faithfully,

Melizza Moore

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/adoptions_174#outgoing-81326

ms hope

18-08-2010, 10:37 PM

Another banned I wonder :rolleyes:

Pauline Lloyd, Solicitor for Cafcass

8 April 2010
Dear Children and Family Court Advisory Support Service,

Dear Sir or Madam,

On how many occasions has Pauline Lloyd, solicitor (Ewings & Co.
Solicitors, London) been appointed by CAFCASS, year by year since
1995, comprising of all cases where the Guardian(s) Amanda Barden
and/or Linda Clark has/have also been appointed. Please state in
how many cases Pauline Lloyd has seen the children she was
appointed to represent prior to the court hearing and in how many
cases she has never met them.

Ian Josephs another former Tory, Kent County Councillor , who is speaking out about children being stolen for forced adoption.

Quote

‘When Cornwall Council state that they cannot comment on individual cases, .what they are really saying is that no matter how badly they treat children in their care they should never have to account to anybody !

Callously their birthday cards and letters were intercepted and destroyed ,contrary to the judges decision that letterbox contact be maintained but the Council maintain they do not have to justify the flouting of court orders.

Winona and Danielle are outraged at the lies they were told by social workers about her mother being a bad woman who did not love them and had abandoned them ! Cornwall Council say they do not have to justify themselves to anybody !

Even when Winona located her mother they were frightened to meet as social workers had told Tracey she would be arrested and imprisoned .
I TOLD THEM BOTH THAT IT WAS RUBBISH and to go ahead and meet!
Result a happy family and two girls who like everyone who has ever been in care HATE social workers with bitter passion’

- ian josephs, monaco, 2/9/2010 8:26

'I was stolen from my mother': The deeply disturbing truth about forced adoption

Winona was told her mother didn't love her - and was handed to another family. Nine years later, they were reunited via Facebook. But forced adoption is happening on a scandalously regular basis.

‘She is being supported by Oxford University law graduate and businessman Ian Josephs, who has championed the cause of parents whose children were forcibly removed by social workers, ever since he was a Tory county councillor in the 1960s.’

Maidstone Borough Council staff & cllrs are very concerned at what is happening to families and children ,many support Cllr Williams although she may not believe this to be the case, in her efforts to support her grandchildren who continue to suffer at the hands of KCC. She spoke out at a scrutiny committee about the abuses within our own council against children after she had been asked to state her reasons to be able to grant a child a free place on a holiday playscheme(Hotfoot) from her devolved budget, and asked to complete a social services referral form on these children which sort her opinion on these families. She refused.(but the webcast was not be working and the minutes removed). Common Purpose is alive and well in Maidstone but no cllr or staff dares to mention it.

Hounded by the Conservatives to stand,it is well known that she wasn’t even a member when she was first elected and only put up as a paper candidate. The common purpose lead Kent Messenger wont print the fact that she resigned from the Conservative Party because of the abuses of her own granddaughters within Kent including the finger printing of young children in school for their library system without parental consent, which she raised with everybody including Paul Carter and leader at Maidstone.

Common knowledge that Eric Hotson the now deputy mayor forged paperwork that suggested that she had joined the Conservative Party when she had only signed for herself . KCC Paul Carter lied to her bare faced when confronted with the truth about not following correct procedures with her grandchildren and others, she was threatened with being labelled mad if she went to the press. She was told outright by the then leader of the Tories Eric Hotson that she could not raise Forced Adoption at the so-called scrutiny meetings which are in any case officer led and a complete waste of time and money, So much for being able to raise any issue.

The only crime she has been guilty of is caring previously for her granddaughters and pointing out the lack of support being offered to families by KCC, taking KCC to the LGO on educational matters of children being forced to go to school aged 4, objecting to biometric finger printing of children as young as 4 without parental consent including her own daughter at Loose Infant School. The governor of Loose Junior School and Greenfield’s Infants School who both introduced the system is Alan Chell a detested KCC cllr who had previously covered the backs of social workers when they had not followed correct procedures witnessed by Cllr Marion Ring concerning the abuse of families including the abuse of funds and lack of financial support.

There has been and is a very personal vendetta against Cllr Williams both prior to and after her election by KCC and many but not all of the Tories who run it.

[A letter a dear friend of mine sent to the Judge in the Family Court,( edited to protect identities) the Judge used paragraph 4 to remove them as party. Yet he failed to answer when asked in Court what would stop children’s services coming after their own children if they failed ‘so-called assessments including a psychological assessment that the Council and Judge were trying to rail road them into.]

After our recent LIP experience of the Family Courts regarding contesting the ICO (at your suggestion), in the hope our granddaughters would be returned to live with their grandparents. We now have ‘little faith’ in either the LA professionals who unfortunately, do not appear to act in the ‘best interests of the children’ or the present system that fails to make them accountable for their actions.

It may just be coincidental that I was standing for election in November 2007 after I had complained to the Director of Children’s Services , on a separate issue and took my complaints to the LGO.

Apparently, we could risk being labelled mad or worse if we go to the press; yet it seems pointless to Appeal without the media.

Regretfully, our stance on being assessed has not changed for the reasons given at the initial hearing; having young children of adoptable ages and no belief in the CSW comment ‘that the SS do not canvas for work’ our family has already been destroyed.

Please do not think us paranoid. A continuous stream of high calibre news articles including award winning Journalists, looking into ‘children’s services’ alongside the UN investigation into our Family Courts, EDM’s signed by numerous MP’s and
Jack Straw’s announcement to allow the press (April2009); all suggest otherwise.

There appears to be a mass of contradictions/inaccuracies and double standards.
Selective incomplete evidence, (mainly opinion based) interpreted as ‘fact’ without the full information requested from September 2002 including ‘notes’ from both the SS and CG. A different criteria/ model supplied (non-relative assessment), which is neither objective nor subjective. And discerning to note that there is no record of us receiving £100 cash from the SS .

Ironically, a Councillor on the ‘Children’s Champion Board’ sort my advice about ‘children’s services’ and is aware of our previous experience.
Although I did not ask him, he seems to have attempted to help; I am not his constituent nor did I ask about kinship care allowance and our children are not known to social care or receive services.

Relatives are expected to jump through hoops and endure fishing trips that were simply not required on the two previous occasions, when XXXX and XXXX were placed in our care, on the second occasion after an interview with CPO.
The LA may have been concerned about a possible Judicial Review and this may have contributed to why an offer of a mandatory referral for (FGC) ‘not best practice’ as suggested in Court, was not forthcoming.

The House of Lords (2008) ‘grandparents only have to be reasonable enough parents’

“Innocent yet presumed guilty unless we comply - On the balance of probabilities?”
We probably have far more experience than many of the professionals involved, having raised 6 children.
Supervisory contact is only required we believe, if there is a danger to the children.
Being a XXXX/CRB checked with no previous concerns, it is insulting and degrading to be only offered expensive supervised contact in an unnatural environment. While our offer of contact in our home (with foster carers if need be) and Cllrs/Corporate Parents offering to be present, is ignored/rejected.
Whilst bizarrely XXXX & XXXX have been transported by taxi virtually on a daily basis from XXXX that is 5 minutes from XXXX, to XXXX approximately a hours drive by their first set of inexperienced carers; all at the taxpayers expense?

Where are our granddaughter’s Human Rights to a family life? Having been placed in foster care, where their well-being has deteriorated after being separated and passed from ‘pillar to post’ and respite care, instead of with relatives.

DCSF – figures suggest that at least 2 children a week die and/or are abused in care.

Research suggests that there are well-evidenced advantages1 for children who cannot live with their parents to be raised by relatives or friends:
Farmer E and Moyers S (2008)‘Kinship Care: Fostering Effective Family and Friends Placements’ (Jessica Kingsley); Doolan et al (2004) Growing up in the Care of Relatives and Friends (Family Rights Group); Hunt J (2003) Family and Friends Care; coping Paper for Dept of Health; Broad, B (ed) (2001) Kinship Care: the placement of choice for children and young people (Russell House; Hunt Waterhouse & Lutman (2008forthcoming) Keeping them in the family (BAAF) Dr Lynne Wrenndall, Charles Pragnell. Lisa Blakemore-Brown, Brian Morgan, Dr Helen Hayward-Brown, Bruce Irvine,
Dr Clive Baldwin, Stephen Clark, Cathy Johnson (2004) Taking the stick away: the service users’ joint statement

It is hoped that XXXX (babies are far more sort after for adoption and a marketable commodity) will be given a Voice Child Advocate, (the CSW rejected this in favour of the CG only).

The FGC Co-ordinator’s comment ‘ holding a FGC at a late stage “energises families” is insulting and worthless when the LA holds all the power and should not be advising family members that I must agree to be assessed.
The joint comments from the LA solicitor and CG who later offered to alter her notes? The LA solicitor told me ‘ the LA only had a duty to consider family members.’
If Human Rights and the PLO can be so brazenly be disregarded/ ignored, is it any wonder that ¾ of children end up adopted or on SGO with strangers instead of relatives.

The CG Solicitor’s remarks outside the Court ‘that LA Counsel could speak for me, or XXXX a passing Solicitor could represent me or they would adjourn and the Court would/could not allow my grandchildren to be placed with us on ICO’ (reiterated the CG comment) and meeting immediately after Court, with the CSW/Counsel, but not us. And the CG & ISW lunching in the Café across the road, all show how cosy the relevant professionals appear to be, hardly independent.

‘ Generally speaking, guardians act as cheerleaders for social services departments. They are entirely compliant, and seem incapable of doing more than being a cheering section’. Eric Pickles MP. (We cannot disagree.)

As Corporate Parents we should act in the way we would if the children were our own. I am appalled at what I perceive to be professionals who fail to act in a professional manner and seem to have no intention of working to reunite children with families. The public would be astonished at the costs involved and outraged that relatives are over looked in favour of expensive foster care.

Totally amazed that such draconian measures of removing children without a mandatory referral for (FGC) can amount to; crystal ball gazing opinion backed up by expensive reports paid for from the public purse.
How is it possible to review a past non event and make a decision based on what may or may not have happened if a FGC had been held, when it could/did not take place?
Children are not mere commodities to be passed around for profit; clearly everyone involved is being paid, (the larger the bundle the more costly?), which could be better spent on ‘real’ child protection and desperately needed front line services to support families to ensure that mandatory FGC referrals are completed; improved services.

I came into politics in order to defend the children of the poor and help make sure that families receive the services they deserve. Councillors are more aware of their responsibility to ‘looked after children’ and the CEO is reviewing the case following a subsequent meeting with the XXXX Leader.

The one simple thing that can never be altered is my granddaughters’ heritage, we are blood relatives, our granddaughters will always be dearly loved and wanted; this can never be obliterated. Hopefully they will be reunited with family members, who if given the opportunity could have applied (if need be) for a RO via private law.

The Court has the power to remedy matters and take the more proportional approach that the LA has not done to-date. Please take into consideration our views and concerns when making your decisions about our granddaughters futures.

Happy birthday Jade Williams 26 today, daughter of Sheena Williams a former Conservative councillor who resigned and stood as an Independent because her own conservative (most are Tory run) county council stole her 4 granddaughters for forced adoption .

Please spare a thought for all the mothers and fathers /grandparents & relatives who have been deprived of their offspring and all the children who have been deprived of their true heritage and inheritance.

Shame on all the corrupt judges that are operating within the secret family courts ministry of just-us rather than 'justice service' aided and abetted by the councils/councillors/ legal teams and at arms length so-called 'independent' service providers.

Clearly, the term 'service/service providers' is used extremely loosely.

Another one stolen by Kent County Council ?

Mary Docherty would like to wish my grandaughter Angel Pointer a very happy eighth birthday,nanny loves you and misses you and can't wait til we're reunited one day xx

mark1963

09-09-2010, 04:22 PM

Thanks for the info ms hope.

ms hope

09-09-2010, 05:32 PM

Thanks for the info ms hope.

You are welcome Mark ;)

This also looks very interesting, a Guardian can appear to leave according to the annotation, then re-register after a few months ? :rolleyes:

This woman no longer works for Cafcass and has either been sacked or finally left after realising that she would not get much further... as of Spring 2010. No doubt other failures will follow into her now vacant footprints!

Would be interesting to know how many cases of forced adoptions Ofsted uncovered or ignored :rolleyes:

ms hope

14-09-2010, 11:16 PM

I think are are many who would disagree with this , actions speak louder than words :rolleyes:

I didn't think I would ever read a county council report that stated "KCC views transparency as a fundamental principle of how we do business" but I have and, yes, I did check the date and it wasn't April 1.

A message from former Conservative Councillor who had her granddaughters stolen for forced adoption.

A wish for my precious first-born granddaughter Elle-May on her 8th birthday

My gift to you my precious granddaughter is wisdom; when the sacred stone of destiny reveals it’s truth and the Lion heart’s awake, you will know that truth can never be a reflection

To know LOVE is to be LOVE, endless, eternal, everlasting

With love Nanny XXX

ms hope

29-09-2010, 08:34 PM

More from Kent :(

Ian Josephs - ( former conservative Kent County Councillor)

Comment in the Telegraph 27/09/2010

A lady called Carol Baker has asked me to use her name and her story to tell people of the wickedness of social workers and police who seem to obey them .

Carol's son Joe aged 5 came home from school in Ashford Kent with a small spot or burn mark on his leg last Wednesday, so his mother just put cream on it because Joe was not bothered by it at all.
On Friday the school noticed this mark and notified social services who called the police .Carol was called to the hospital so she went in a hurry in a social worker's car leaving her bag and money behind with the promise that she would be given a lift back later.Carol however was arrested and flung into a cell in Folkestone 15 miles away where she was kept until midnight.
Police threatened her that if she did not sign a document they needed she would never see her children again.She therefore signed a paper allowing social services to take her children while she was in jail but that she could see them after being interviewed by the police.

After the interview she was not allowed to see her son but instead, after confiscating her mobile phone and ensuring she had no money jeering police threw her out into the darkened streets after midnight and told her to walk the 15 miles home by herself in the dark !!
Scared stiff,that was exactly what Carol did ,so she arrived exhausted as day was breaking at her home in Ashford.

There she found more drama as her other son Chris aged 15 recounted what had happened during the night at home in Ashford.....

At around 9;30 pm three police cars ,sirens blaring drove up to the house .A squad of uniformed police and several social workers burst into the house and woke up a terrified Zoe who had been fast asleep.Without delay or any explanation they bundled her into one of the police cars screaming in anguish for her mother who had been kept out of the way in jail ,probably so that the abduction could be more easily accomplished.

This believe it or not is ",politically correct"Britain today and it's still getting worse :mad:

Once again the police provide the muscle for social workers to seize children, says Christopher Booker.

Eleven days ago a Kent mother noticed a small mark on her five-year-old son’s ankle. He couldn’t say what had caused it. She dabbed on some antiseptic cream and thought no more about it. Two days later his school noticed the mark and contacted social services. The mother was summoned to hospital and told to sign a form allowing her two children to be kept in care by social workers until she had been interviewed by the police. She was driven 15 miles to Folkestone police station where she was interviewed and held in a cell until midnight. The police then confiscated her BlackBerry, saying it was needed as evidence, and told her she would have to walk home.

Terrified and crying, she walked 15 miles in the dark, arriving home as dawn was breaking, She then discovered that at 9.45 the previous evening, three police cars had arrived at the house with sirens blaring. Four policemen and a social worker had woken her seven-year-old daughter to remove her, sobbing, in her nightclothes.
Last week the parents were told by social workers that they would face a care order on the children, whom they were allowed to see briefly on condition that they did not discuss why the children had been taken from home. The police promised the mother’s solicitor that they would return her BlackBerry, worth over £200. But they then told her there was no record of it on their system.

I emailed Kent police twice last week to ask whether they could confirm or deny the details of this story, but have had no reply.

In my item last week headed “Why are the police providing muscle for forced adoptions?”, I described how a south London mother was removed to a psychiatric hospital with the aid of six policemen and three social workers, in order to hand her two children to their estranged father. After the two girls tried three times to escape, and a tribunal found there was no reason for their mother to be detained, the family was last week happily reunited.
But once again I must ask why the police support social workers in this astonishingly heavy-handed way, when too often, it seems, there is no good reason to snatch children from their homes in the first place.

Dear Ms Turner
Annual unannounced inspection of contact, referral and assessment
arrangements within Kent County Council children’s services
This letter summarises the findings of the recent unannounced inspection of contact,
referral and assessment arrangements within local authority children’s services in
Kent County Council which was conducted on 10 and 11 August 2010. The inspection
was carried out under section 138 of the Education and Inspections Act 2006. It will
contribute to the annual review of the performance of the authority’s children’s
services, for which Ofsted will award a rating later in the year. I would like to thank
all of the staff we met for their assistance in undertaking this inspection.
The inspection sampled the quality and effectiveness of contact, referral and
assessment arrangements and their impact on minimising any child abuse and
neglect. Inspectors considered a range of evidence, including: electronic case
records; supervision files and notes; observation of social workers and senior
practitioners undertaking referral and assessment duties; and other information
provided by staff and managers. Inspectors also spoke to a range of staff including
managers, social workers, other practitioners and administrative staff.
The inspection identified one area for priority action alongside areas of strength,
satisfactory practice and areas for development.
From the evidence gathered, the following features of the service were identified:
Strengths
Kent and Medway out-of-hours service undertakes effective work to ensure that
children identified as at risk of significant harm are appropriately safeguarded.
Operational relationships between social care and Kent police Child Abuse
Investigation Unit (CAIU) are consistently timely and constructive in responding

to the immediate protection needs of identified children.
Changes in procedure and practice have taken place as a direct consequence of
learning from serious case reviews. Additionally, there are quarterly events at
district level for all social care staff aimed at ensuring serious case review and
other safeguarding learning takes place.
Satisfactory practice
Up-to-date child protection policy and procedures are in place, providing a clear
framework for agencies in implementing responsibilities for, and contributing to,
meeting children’s safeguarding needs.
Referrals and contacts are communicated by the contact and assessment
service in a timely way, ensuring equality of access initially to children’s social
care.
Thresholds and arrangements for access to children’s social care and
collaborative working are clearly defined. However, some partner agencies
consider thresholds for intervention are set too high.
Child protection enquiries, when conducted, are always carried out by a
qualified social worker and meet satisfactory standards.
Case note recording is consistently timely and other related records are mainly
up-to-date, providing a clear picture of the current circumstances on cases.
Good communication between professionals involved with children in need was
noted with their views and relevant information appropriately incorporated into
initial and core assessments.
Senior managers take steps to seek assurance of the quality of services
provided through themed and externally commissioned audits and have
arrangements in place for the provision of key performance indicators data.
Staff report that they feel well supported by their manager and are encouraged
to undertake appropriate training. An extensive recruitment and retention
strategy has resulted in the council employing a significant number of newly
qualified social workers who are supported in establishing their practice through
a Newly Qualified Social Worker scheme.
Areas for development
Arrangements for prevention and early intervention through the common
assessment framework are inconsistently applied by agencies in the county.
Some referrals for social care intervention, seen by inspectors, could have been
dealt with through coordinated work by universal services.

2

The record of agreed actions from strategy meetings between children’s social
care and the CAIU in child protection matters is not always shared in a timely
way between the agencies and delays of several weeks can take place before
the formal record is shared.
The reliability of performance management information is undermined by a
variable and inaccurate application of the statutory guidance on the
commencement and completion of some initial assessments by managers.
The quality of analysis in assessments is variable with some lacking sufficient
focus on key risk factors.
Children’s wishes and feelings are insufficiently evidenced in assessments or
impact on plans. In many cases recording is unclear whether children are seen
alone or that their home environment and sleeping arrangements have been
considered.
Attention to identifying and responding to the diverse needs of some children
and their parents and carers is inconsistent, although there are individual
examples of good work.
Management oversight and decision making are inconsistently applied and
there is a lack of locally generated performance management information at
team level. There are examples of inappropriate decision making by managers.
Team managers and principal social workers have responsibility for a number of
children’s cases; some are held on the basis that there are insufficient qualified
and experienced social workers to whom these can be allocated. This leads to
delays in undertaking assessments and delivering services.
The frequency and quality of staff supervision are insufficiently evidenced in
key areas such as identifying development needs, enabling critically reflective
practice, ensuring the implementation of plans, and progressing the timely
throughput of work.
Children’s records are stored in three different forms that are not linked or
integrated within a single information and data platform. This leads to potential
gaps in practitioners having a full understanding of children’s assessments and
plans.

This visit has identified the fol owing area for priority action:
Area for priority action
Some children in need of protection do not receive an adequate and timely
assessment of risks and needs, leaving them at risk of harm. A significant
shortfall in the capacity of qualified, experienced social workers and

3

weaknesses in the quality of team manager oversight on child protection cases
in some duty and assessment teams contribute to these serious concerns.

Any areas for development and priority action identified above will be specifically
considered in any future inspection of services to safeguard children within your
area.
In addition, it is considered by Ofsted that the findings of this inspection and the
identified area for priority action are likely to become a limiting judgement of the
annual children’s services assessment when considered with other evidence. This
means the annual assessment is likely to be limited to ‘performs poorly’.
Yours sincerely

Brendan Parkinson
Her Majesty’s Inspector

Copy: Katherine Kerswell, Chief Executive, Kent County Council

David Worlock, Chair of Kent Safeguarding Children Board

Sarah Hohler, Lead Member for Children’s Services, Kent County Council

Andrew Spencer, Department for Education

4

ms hope

20-10-2010, 12:22 PM

http://www.community-champions.org/gallery/search

Why is the Community Champions website, denying the public a right to democratically vote ! :(

Something is VERY WRONG - it could be construed as trying to cover-up paedophilia.

Why would they remove Robert Green, Chris Wittwer, Bill Maloney and now Brian Gerrish ? :mad:

Ian Josephs a former Conservative Kent County Councillor was also removed.

http://www.forced-adoption.com/introduction.asp

You would think with his connections to Lord Michael Hesletine i.e business partner with whom he ran bedsitters and then an hotel in Bayswayer, that this would have helped …or maybe not ….:rolleyes:

http://www.ukcolumn.org/2010/02/04/more-than-corrupt

Scroll down for a picture of

‘ Lord Heseltine, David Cameron and Matthew Bryne’ :eek:

Wirral Childrens Charity Boss Admits Child Porn Charges But Denies Other Sex Offences - Matthew Byrne - listed as a member of the local advisory board of Common Purpose in Liverpool.

Born in Bangladesh, Manzila Pola Uddin came to the UK as a teenager and went on to become a community worker and social services officer, while at the same time pursuing a political career that saw her rise to be deputy leader of Tower Hamlets council in the early 1990s.

She was made a peer by Tony Blair in 1998, and took the title Baroness Uddin of Bethal Green in our London Borough of Tower Hamlets. Then aged 38, she was the youngest woman in the Lords.

(didn’t she do well, who says social work doesn’t pay):rolleyes:

Baroness Uddin, who became Britain’s first Muslim peer in 1998, could be suspended until Easter 2012, or eve longer if she refuses to repay the £125.349.10 as recommended in the conduct committee report. Baroness Uddin claimed for a second home in Maidstone, despite living in east London.

1. a copy of the Toptemps, contract and fee schedules for
recruitment to Kent County Council

2. all agencies on the Toptemps contract for the supply of social
workers, senior practitioners, assistant team managers, team
managers and service managers (referred to from now as "qualified
social work professionals") to Kent County Council

3. all agencies currently supplying Kent County Council with agency
social work professionals

4. the total number of qualified social work professionals
currently working on an agency basis Kent County Council

5. the number and grade of qualified social work professionals
currently working on an agency basis at Kent County Council by
supplier

6. the number and grade of qualified social work professionals
currently working on an agency basis at Kent County Council by
department/region

7. the pay and agency charge rate of each qualified social work
professional currently working on an agency basis at Kent County
Council by department

8. the fiscal budget for qualified social work professional
recruitment through agencies for 2009-2010

9. the fiscal budget for qualified social work professional
recruitment through agencies for 2010-2011

10. the total fiscal spend on agency qualified social work
professionals by department for the last 12 months

11. the total fiscal spend on agency qualified social work
professionals by agency for the last 12 months

Yours faithfully,

Helen O'Regan

Kent County Council is a very large local authority; our employee
headcount is approaching 45,000, approximately 30,000 working in schools
and 15,000 directly for KCC. KCC is split into five directorates, each
with their own devolved powers and financial management so consequently,
very few records are centralised making our ability to answer
authority-wide requests for information very difficult within the
appropriate limit.

1. a copy of the Toptemps, contract and fee schedules for recruitment to
Kent County Council

There is a confidential Memorandum of Understanding between Kent County
Council and Kent Top Temps therefore there is no schedule of fees for
Social Workers. All recruitment is via mini tenders. :eek::rolleyes:

2. all agencies on the Toptemps contract for the supply of social workers,
senior practitioners, assistant team managers, team managers and service
managers (referred to from now as "qualified social work professionals")
to Kent County Council
This information is commercially sensitive and therefore exempt from
disclosure under section 43 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000. No
names of agencies are disclosed to either hiring managers or other
suppliers on the list. There are 15 Agencies on the list.

3. all agencies currently supplying Kent County Council with agency social
work professionals
This information is commercially sensitive and therefore exempt from
disclosure under section 43 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

4. the total number of qualified social work professionals currently
working on an agency basis Kent County Council
As at 30th September 2010, there were 30

5. the number and grade of qualified social work professionals currently
working on an agency basis at Kent County Council by supplier

This information is commercially sensitive and therefore exempt from
disclosure under section 43 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000.
However, it is unusual for KCC to stipulate a grade as their requirement
is generally to meet demand.

6. the number and grade of qualified social work professionals currently
working on an agency basis at Kent County Council by department/region
This information is commercially sensitive and therefore exempt from
disclosure under section 43 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

7. the pay and agency charge rate of each qualified social work
professional currently working on an agency basis at Kent County Council
by department
This information is commercially sensitive and therefore exempt from
disclosure under section 43 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

Information to answer the following four questions is only held by one of
KCC*s five Directorates; Kent Adult Social Services. This is because KCC
does not have a specific account code within our financial database
(ORACLE) for this type of expenditure and the devolved management of KCC
means different directorates record financial transactions in different
ways. Please note that KASS doesn't hold budgets as a rule for agency
staff, as teams should have budgets for employed staff which in theory
would then underspend through having vacancies; this would then offset the
costs of employing agency staff where necessary.

8. the fiscal budget for qualified social work professional recruitment
through agencies for 2009-2010
The KASS budget was £91,000

9. the fiscal budget for qualified social work professional recruitment
through agencies for 2010-2011
The KASS budget is currently £161,000

10. the total fiscal spend on agency qualified social work professionals
by department for the last 12 months

The estimated spend is £972,394

11. the total fiscal spend on agency qualified social work professionals
by agency for the last 12 months
£4263.00 4 Social Work

£8243.04 Beresford Blake International Ltd.

£4578.85 Blue Group

£780.00 Private individual

£947,737.84 Kent Top Temps Ltd.

£5358.40 Locum Replacement Group Ltd.

£1394.63 Reliance Human resources Ltd.

£38.00 Private Individual

To extrapolate the information from other Directorate Finance teams would
exceed the appropriate limit of £450 equivalent to 18 hours @ £25 per
hour. Therefore, we are under no obligation to comply with this element of
your request under section 12 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

kreynolds left an annotation (27 October 2010)

The agreement between Top Temps cannot be commercially sensitive as all contracts placed by the council should be open to public tender to the lowest cost bidder. Anything paid to this company is not “commercially sensitive” as KCC is a public body and accountable to you the council tax payer! Not some guy driving a Ferrari

How can it be “commercially sensitive” this is strongly suggestive of corruption.

The figures show something is seriously wrong

kreynolds left an annotation (27 October 2010)

"Memorandum of Understanding"

Totally unlawful

ms hope

08-11-2010, 06:33 PM

Please sign This Petition

http://www.gopetition.com/petition/40486.html

Against Social Services Stealing Innocent Children

Target: UK GOVERNMENT and EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND UNITED NATIONS.

Background (Preamble):

Please sign this petition to stop social services and social workers stealing innocent well loved and cared for children from loving innocent families. My baby granddaughter has been stolen by lies and deception used by social services and social workers in the closed family courts. They are paid to lie and destroy innocent families for the government's forced adoption law. Thousands of families have had their children ripped from them, even as early as birth because of what ifs and maybe's.

We all need to stand together and fight the severe injustice we are made to suffer. The abuse inflicted on our children and babies by social services and social workers.

STOP FORCED ADOPTION.
STOP SOCIAL SERVICES.
STOP INJUSTICE.
OPEN THE CLOSED FAMILY COURTS.
STOP THE LIES.

I am not aware that private fostering has any effect whatsoever on Kent Social Services. In actual fact it is a huge cottage industry within Kent that brings many millions of pounds into the county. To my knowledge there is no responsibility whatsoever placed upon KCC for the welfare of these children and this point is factually incorrect. The money for the fostering is paid by the council who places the child in Kent. Kent do not pay to foster children from other areas and fostering is a highly lucrative and profitable profession. Payments are up to £600 (per child) a week tax free sometimes considerably more in complex/difficult cases.

I have had personal dealing with Kent Children’s Services and I can tell you a huge issue is the lack of any proper protocols and procedures. There is also appalling/non-existent record keeping, virtually no written records. Supervision does not exist, they don’t carry out risk assessments they are absolutely useless! My son was on a supervision order with KCC and the social worker concerned visited my son and often wrote one line for home visits. For example one visit said “smiling baby, does not come to me automatically like other children”. This is a gross breach of the duty of the social worker to keep proper notes of home visits. There are also alarming gaps in between visits despite the placement in this case being extremely risky. In my case the person concerned has had five other children removed for significant emotional harm and neglect. My child has also been taken to the GP in excess of 100 times for NOS “no obvious symptoms“ and there is a pattern of this behaviour with the existing children. I was later told this was due to the mother “anxieties” but what about the impact of this behaviour on my son who is being medicalised? No expert involved just some social worker making a conclusion based on what: your non existent supervision?

I refer you to her news story done with the BBC. In this KCC defends a man who smashed his baby’s skull. “The problem is there was no conviction” : http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/kent/8572027.stm

WRONG!

The problem is you did not have proper protocols are procedures in place to deal with a referral concerning a social work client. Ironically the man was convicted in any case for assault on a family member plus additional cautions for child neglect. What kind of person would go out on a limb to defend a person who smashed their child’s skull I ask you? Not only defend them but come out with a pack of lies to justify the departments inaction when they were informed twice by the family and at least once by a heath care professional(s) of significant concerns and risk.

ms hope

13-11-2010, 04:25 PM

Did this LIB MP who set-up ' families for justice' really work inconjunction with Tory MP Hugh Robertson to stop the forced adoption of the
4 granddaughters of former Tory Councillor Sheena Williams ? :rolleyes:

What help did former Tory MP Ann Widdecombe offer ?:rolleyes:

Are they along with all MP's merely information gatherers who ensure that information remains hidden and families/grandparents have no 'real' voice ? :(

Why have the media suddenly put out the article (below) after
John Hemming MP has been joined virtually by the hip
(in many of The Telegraph articles by Christopher Booker - exposing these family injustices) to Ian Josephs - former Tory Kent County Councillor who has a long history of connections to Lord Michael Hesletine including business connections :confused:

When will the real hero's such as Brian Gerrish ever get a mention in any of the tabloids :rolleyes::(

(John Hemming MP):mad:

How millionaire love cheat MP at centre of stolen cat mystery took out £200k loan paid for by YOU

I bet there are many who regret becoming involved with the Conservative Party :rolleyes: it really doesnt matter which party is in control of the councils if all the councillors are turning a blind eye.

Forced adoption: another win for the child snatchers
The case of Tony and Debbie Sims illustrates the cruelty of our child protection system, says Christopher Booker.

In 43 years of medical practice, said the family’s GP, he had “never encountered a case of such appalling injustice”. To their neighbours, it was so shocking that up to 100 of them were ready to stage a public protest, until being banned from doing so by social workers and the police.
This was the case of Tony and Debbie Sims, which I first reported in July 2009 under the headline “ 'Evil destruction’ of a happy family”, and whom I can now name because their daughter, torn from them for no good reason, has finally, after three years of misery in foster care and 74 court hearings, been adopted.

The story of Mr and Mrs Sims was my first introduction to that Kafka-esque world of state child-snatching which I have so often reported on since. It illustrates so many of the reasons why, hidden behind its self-protective wall of secrecy, this ruthless and corrupt system has become a major national scandal.

Until April 2007, Mr Sims, a professional dog breeder, and his wife, then a branch vice-chairman of the local Conservative Party, were a respectable middle-class couple living happily with their five-year-old daughter, who was the apple of their eye. Shortly after Mr Sims was interviewed by the RSPCA over his unwitting infringement of a new law banning the tail-docking of puppies, their home was invaded by two RSPCA officials and 18 policemen, who had been given a wholly erroneous tip-off that there were guns on the premises.

When the dogs were released from their kennels and rampaged through the house, ripping apart his daughter’s pet boxer, Mr Sims strongly protested – verbally but not physically. He and his wife were arrested and taken away, leaving their little girl, aged five, screaming amid the chaos. Social workers were called and the child was removed into foster care. While Mrs Sims was being held for several hours in a police cell, she had a miscarriage. She returned home that night to find her daughter gone.

When the couple next saw their child – months later, at a “contact” – she said she had been told they were dead and had gone to heaven. For three years they tried to get her back through those 74 court hearings. The social workers claimed the child had been maltreated, because her home was an unholy mess. But this was only because of the police raid and the dogs – a WPC who had visited the house a month earlier on other business reported that it had been “neat and tidy”.

The child could not understand why she was not allowed to go back home with her parents. The courts were unable to consider a report by an experienced independent social worker which the couple were told described them as responsible and loving parents. The only evidence the court heard was that from the social workers and their own “experts”.

When the couple were eventually told that their child would be adopted, they appealed. In a judgment last year, which the media were permitted to report, Mr Justice Boden ruled that because the parents had not shown sufficient co﷓operation with the authorities (after four psychiatric assessments of the couple, the father refused to submit to a fifth), the adoption had to go ahead.

One of the first people to contact the parents when this was made public was that independent social worker, who expressed astonishment, saying he had assumed that, because the social workers’ case seemed so flimsy, the family would have long since been reunited. Last week, however, Mr and Mrs Sims had a two-sentence note to say their daughter has now been adopted.
Since I first wrote about this case in 2009, I have come to recognise many of its features in dozens of others I have followed: the mob-handed involvement of the police; the seizing of children for no good reason; the inability of social workers to admit they have made a mistake; the way lawyers supposedly acting for the parents seem to be on the other side; the refusal of judges to look objectively at all the evidence, and their willingness to accept nonsense if told to them by social workers and their “experts”. Too often, these proceedings get away with standing every honourable principle of British justice on its head.

Such is the Frankenstein’s monster created by Parliament in the 1989 Children Act. Yet apart from the tireless John Hemming, and a handful of other MPs shocked into awareness by individual cases in their constituencies, the majority seem wholly unconcerned. So what do we pay them for?

‘career starting in Nursing and then in Social Work. I started in
psychiatric nursing and qualified as a registered mental nurse (RMN)
before going on to study psychiatric social work and gaining my CQSW
(Certificate of Qualification in Social Work). I then went on to do
further training in mental health at the Tavistock Institute :eek:and with the
Richmond Fellowship as well as in the Health Service, and undertook
postgraduate training courses both at Exeter and Bristol Universities. As
a practitioner I worked as part of a project closing large psychiatric
hospitals in Devon where we were one of the first areas to develop
alternative housing for former patients. I then applied to join East
Sussex County Council where I managed all the social services (as it was
then defined) for Brighton, Hove and Lewes. Throughout this period, up
until I joined Kent County Council, I retained a small caseload. While I
was there I was asked to be part of the Clunis Inquiry, looking
particularly at the implications for policy. I also initiated an approach
to conferences where 90% of the audience were service users. In Kent as
Director of Operations and then as Strategic Director of Social Services,
I chaired the Kent Child Protection Committee for thirteen years
Registered Mental Nurse (RMN)
Certificate of Qualification in Social Work (CQSW) diploma - 1972
Plus a range of post-qualifying training, particularly in psychiatry

(b) Amount of time employed by Kent County Council and positions held.

(d) All declarations of interest including whether or not he is a member
of the Freemasons, whilst employed by Kent County Council.

Peter Gilroy has made the following declarations of interest:
Member of:
Institute of Directors
Association of County Chief Executives - USA
Board Member of New Local Government Network

Charities - Kent Fund for Children - Board Member

Peter Gilroy is not, and never has been, a Freemason
(e) Salary received from Kent County Council on a yearly basis from 2000
and any and all previous periods; if employed prior to 2000.Including all
privileges and perks in addition to salaries received.(not inclusive of
private health care /cars etc): dates/costs/invoices.

Total remuneration for the following periods of employment is shown below
within bands of £10,000.
1991/2 £40,000 to £49,999
1992/3 £50,000 to £59,999
1993/4 £50,000 to £59,999
1994/5 £60,000 to £69,999
1995/6 £50,000 to £59,999
1996/7 £60,000 to £69,999
1997/8 £70,000 to £79,999
1998/9 £100,000 to £110,000 (promoted April 1998)
1999/2000 £100,000 to £110,000
2000/1 £100,000 to £110,000
2001/2 £120,000 to £130,000
2002/3 £160,000 to £169,999
2003/4 £130,000 to £139,999
2004/5 £160,000 to £169,999
2005/6 £220,000 to £229,999
2006/7 £230,000 to £239,999
2007/8 £250,000 to £259,999

(f) If he has been on a Common Purpose training course.
Including dates/costs/invoices.
Peter Gilroy has never been on a Common Purpose training course as a
delegate.

(g) If he also teachers or has taught on Common Purpose training courses.
Including dates/costs/invoices.

Peter Gilroy has spoken to delegates on Common Purpose programmes giving
lectures about his role as Chief Executive and his broader experience of
management and innovation. He spoke at events on 15th March 2006 and 15th
May 2007. No charge was ever made by KCC or Peter Gilroy himself for
these talks.

(h) Any and all connections whatsoever if any with the
Conservative Party.(Clearly, very important because Kent County Council is
and has been for many years Conservative led.

None. Peter Gilroy has never been affiliated to any political party at
any time in his career. Nor has he attended a party conference organised
by any political party.
(i) Any and all previous employment with other Local Authorities.

1968 to 1986 Devon County Council
1986 to 1991 East Sussex County Council

A teenager under the care of social services has been found dead in a Gravesend flat, sparking a child protection investigation.

Police found the body of 14-year-old Edward Barry at an address in Parrock Street, where a collection of flowers and tribute messages to the popular Gravesend Grammar School pupil has since appeared.

Police are treating his death as unexplained, following an inconclusive post mortem examination. They are awaiting the results of a toxicology report on the teenager, who is thought to have been taking drugs the night before he was found dead at the property in the early hours of Friday, November 20. A spokesman said this could take up to five weeks.

Kent County Council's child social services has also launched an investigation into the death, in conjunction with Kent Police. :rolleyes:

In a joint statement they said: "We are deeply sorry at the tragic death of this young man. Our thoughts are with his family and his friends.

"Our primary concern is the welfare of the family. We are doing all we can to support the family though this tragedy."

A KCC spokesman said the youngster was being supported by "a number of agencies, including children's social services" when he died, but the council said it cannot reveal any more about the circumstances of the death for fear of compromising either of the investigations.

Parents Patrick and Justine Barry said: "Ed was a very much loved son, brother and friend. He attended Gravesend Grammar School for Boys and will undoubtedly be greatly missed there too."

Friends have also paid tribute, many of them on social networking website Facebook. One of them, Mollie Payne, told the Messenger: "Ed's life was so full of dignity. He was an amazing caring person, made everyone smile and had so much to live for."

Others remember the keen skateboarder from gatherings at Gravesend's Lord Street car park, a teenage hang-out where skaters often congregate.

Lets hope that the police investigation is more in depth than the Kent Kendall House Childrens Home abuse case :rolleyes:

ms hope

28-11-2010, 10:38 PM

Would you trust this man with your children , Conservative leader of Kent County Council and Corporate parent who has recently apologised for the third rate child protection services offered in Kent ?

http://save-kent.blogspot.com/search/label/Paul%20Carter

Are these the eyes of a loving a parent ?:rolleyes:

ms hope

29-11-2010, 12:23 AM

DAMNED IF THEY DO

quote:

Please could you send me a schedule of how the local authority have supported my family since we were categorised as a family in need by Kent County Council according to their duties under Part 3 of the Children Act.

http://www.mediafire.com/?igb0f758y7ed677

ms hope

29-11-2010, 11:36 PM

How convenient no mention of the forced adoption cases ???? :rolleyes:

29 November 2010

Review looks at 7,000 child protection cases in Kent :rolleyes:

An urgent review of 7,000 cases has been launched after Kent County Council's (KCC) child protection services were found to be inadequate.
KCC apologised on 19 November after Ofsted published a report which found cause for concern over most services intended to protect children.

Its cabinet was told on Monday that principal social workers and team leaders were reviewing every case.

The review, audited by district managers, will be done by 23 December.
It is among a series of measures put in place since Ofsted carried out its unannounced inspection in August.

The cabinet was told that since the report was published 10 days ago, the director of specialist children's services had visited all 12 district offices to discuss its implications with staff.

Reduce case load

An improvement plan has also been put in place to deliver Ofsted's recommendations, which included streamlined form-filling, better retention of experienced social workers, improved management and improved education of looked-after children.

But the cabinet was told the absolute top priority was to reduce social workers' case loads to a maximum of 30 each.

To this end, a recruitment drive has already reduced social worker vacancies from 26% in February to 11% at the end of October.

In addition, 50 new social workers have been recruited from Europe to start next year and more will be recruited from Ireland.

Another 33 social work students due to qualify next summer have already been recruited.

KCC leader Paul Carter has promised that substantial improvements to child services will be in place by the time Ofsted carries out a follow-up inspection in 12 months' time.:rolleyes:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-11869995

Is this just a call for MORE social workers for the ARMY in the government's WAR ON FAMILIES.
Soon England will be a team of police and social workers. Trafficked children may even be our biggest export - AFTER WEAPONS!

ms hope

29-11-2010, 11:37 PM

UK SOCIAL SERVICES ACTION ON BRITISH FAMILIES IS NOT ANYMORE A BRITISH SECRET.:)

by Paul on Politics, by political editor Paul Francis Tuesday, November 30 2010

NOT unreasonable. Not unlawful. That’s the conclusion of Kent County Council’s auditors about various six-figure payouts to some of its top officers – including the infamous £200,000 paid to former chief executive Peter Gilroy.
But while KCC can take some consolation from these conclusions, it can be less sanguine about some of the auditor’s other critical comments about how various deals and compromise payments were negotiated.
Read how Gilroy's £200k cost £408k

And many people will be shocked that the £200,000 payment offered to Mr Gilroy to ensure his pension was not adversely affected after he agreed to extend his contract actually cost the taxpayer a staggering £408,000.
KCC chose not to disclose this information at the time and even in February this year, when The KM Group broke the story about the payment to Mr Gilroy, no-one mentioned that the cost to the public purse was twice the actual sum.

Auditors have a reputation of measuring any criticisms they may have rather carefully but there’s no disguising that they regard the county council’s arrangements for negotiating severance deals as having considerable shortcomings.

Their report talks about “recurring weaknesses” in the authority’s arrangements.

The consideration of value for money “was not adequately documented.” There was a “lack of effective performance management of staff.” There was “little evidence” to show that the council “assessed the relative strength of individual legal claims against it” or that “payments made achieved the best/lowest settlement for council taxpayers.”

Perhaps most damaging is that “reports to members did not always provide a full, balanced view of the circumstances of individual cases.”
In the case of the controversial £200k that came Mr Gilroy’s way “the report to [KCC’s] personnel committee “fell short” of the standards; was "very brief" and “did not set out the full cost to the council - £408k. Neither did it “explore alternative options or evaluate value for money” and “it was not shared in advance with the Director of Finance.”

A pretty serious rap on the knuckles, then, on a subject that has done more to anger council taxpayers’ than probably anything else in the last year.

Is it, just me, who is sickened by the constant claim, now plastered on Kent's KCC website, suggesting the local authority is somehow excellent.

The recent news that KCC, has left children at grave risk, underlines the danger of KCC's mind set, the notion that both Cllr Paul Carter has promoted, along with senior officers in the past, of Kent council being excellent, does nothing to deter the sort of complacency that resulted in Ofsted's damning report.

Currently KCC website, is promoting itself with this very questionable claim "A council that performs excellently" when clearly it doesn't. Obviously this is complete bollix, who exactly endorsed this assertion I wonder, no doubt, some fellow public sector dib dobs?

Cllr Paul Carter, the leader of the controlling group of KCC, ought to explain why KCC justifies suggestions of excellence when the council have made so many cock ups, I just wonder if KCC had to put its claim to trading standards, how long the excellence tag would stand up.

Here are just some examples of why, this surely cannot be true, 50 million pounds melted away in Iceland, many hundreds of thousands wasted on projects like, flights to America (hushed up), Kent TV, film finance which failed on any commercial level, poor performing schools, fat bonus payments to council officers that fail to convince the public and others of worth.

Just as an example of the continuing controversial management of KCC take a gander at this report from Paul Francis, political editor for KM group.
http://bignewsmargate.blogspot.com/

ms hope

03-12-2010, 01:29 AM

Vice head of Diana's former school, social worker background. Isn’t it funny how this never got a mention in the local papers, even though he has been investigated twice :eek: :rolleyes:

You would think someone would have picked up on it or may be it wasn't considered important enough to warrant a mention :rolleyes:

‘But we can reveal that the senior teacher, known as Bill by colleagues, was accused of inappropriate behaviour with pupils at the special school in July 2002.’

“According to its website, The New School has only one aim, "to rebuild young damaged lives through education."
“aim is to help children who are "emotionally scarred by abuse, bereavement, bullying or other trauma".

‘That course in Birmingham, in turn, is believed to have been lectured by Peter Righton, a notorious paedophile who attempted to legitimise his obsession in a series of academic studies. Righton, for his part, belonged to the Paedophile Information Exchange, along with Jack Bennett who joined in the abuse at Greystone. Righton had earlier worked in the same childrens’ home in Maidstone, Kent :rolleyes: as Peter Howarth, who went on to become a legendary abuser in the homes of North Wales where he shared his indulgence with Steve Norris, formerly of Greystone.’

Please could you tell me how many people have complained about
reports made by the following people and out of these complaints,
how many have been upheld. Could I also ask for statistics on the
number of family cases they have written reports for verses the
number of cases won by the local authority.

Graham Flatman psychologist, often referred to as Dr Flatman even
though he isn't a doctor. Works from a PO Box in Faversham.

Dr Paul Millard psychiatrist.
Oliver Hockley
Dr Donald Bermingham.
These three are from the Child and Family Court Assessment Service.

I would also like to ask if it is lawful for these kinds of
specialists to use pure conjecture in their reports and if the
courts are in agreements with such conjecture being used instead of
hard facts?

Is it lawful for them to put before the court out of date
information or their interpretation of out of date material, which
has not been proven as fact in a court of law?

Are they allowed to slander someone's name in court with untruths
and conjecture and if so, is the injured party allowed to raise
this in court and ask for redress in such a case?

A Williamson made this Freedom of Information request to Kent and Medway NHS and Social Care Partnership Trust

I write further to your recent request for information about the number of
complaints about reports made by named individuals and would advise that
following investigation, I can confirm that none of the individuals listed
in your request are employed by Kent & Medway NHS & Social Care
Partnership Trust and, therefore, we are not in a position to respond to
this part of your enquiry.

You have also asked about procedures for reports to contain "conjecture"
as opposed to fact and, in this regard, I can provide you with a general
response. The Trust retains all personal information in accordance with
the Data Protection Act 1998 and recognises that Health Professionals may
be required to document professional opinions as well as factual
information when writing both formal documents and recording activity in
the health records of individuals. All Trust staff are required to comply
with record keeping standards and the recording of professional opinions
needs to done with due consideration to the duty of care to the patient.
Professional judgement will need to be exercised to ensure that the record
accurately reflects the professional opinion and clearly defines the
information as professional opinion as opposed to fact. The information
must be sufficient for its purpose and contain enough information to
enable a reader to interpret it correctly and, in some circumstances, it
may be necessary to explain the circumstances surrounding the opinion or
evidence on which it is based.

Please could you tell me how many people have complained about
reports made by the following people and out of these complaints,
how many have been upheld. Could I also ask for statistics on the
number of family cases they have written reports for verses the
number of cases won by the local authority.

Graham Flatman psychologist, often referred to as Dr Flatman even
though he isn't a doctor. Works from a PO Box in Faversham.

Dr Paul Millard psychiatrist.
Oliver Hockley
Dr Donald Bermingham.
These three are from the Child and Family Court Assessment Service.

I would also like to ask if it is lawful for these kinds of
specialists to use pure conjecture in their reports and if the
courts are in agreements with such conjecture being used instead of
hard facts?

Is it lawful for them to put before the court out of date
information or their interpretation of out of date material, which
has not been proven as fact in a court of law?

Are they allowed to slander someone's name in court with untruths
and conjecture and if so, is the injured party allowed to raise
this in court and ask for redress in such a case?

Yes, an EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGIST not a clinical one called Andrew Kawalek from Carter Brown Associates in Mansfield made out he wrote the reports for the Jersey care home scandal thing. He said to me that "nothing untoward happened there". ( Not what I heard from the mouths of the survivors in August) .Made out he had wrote them. But it wasn't. They were written by Dr Kathy Bull. His C.V that is online, differs to the one that were in court documents. He claims he was assessing us both, but my husband didn't agree to the testing. Made out that I have a personality disorder. When it has NEVER been diagnosed by anybody , least of all no PSYCHIATRIST. An ed psych is not qualified in that way.

There is no point going to the HPC as I tried too, with the evidence supplied that showed FRAUD of the part of CAFCASS , my children's solicitor ( social services minions) but they sided with him as no collegue defecates on another as they all are in the same pot. Carter Brown associates are used A LOT in care proceedings. They are one of the favourite companies.

ms hope

14-12-2010, 04:19 PM

Policeman cleared of Kent A21 death crash charge :eek:

A police officer has been cleared of causing the death by dangerous driving of a mother-of-three in Kent.

Pc Nigel Brown, 47, was behind the wheel of an unmarked police car when it was involved in the head-on crash on the A21 in Tonbridge.
But he told Maidstone Crown Court there was nothing he could have done to avoid the crash which killed Felicity Austin, 29, in May 2009.
Pc Brown was also cleared of causing death by careless driving.

Jurors heard he was driving within the speed limit, at 55mph, when his Skoda Octavia crashed into Miss Austin's Renault Megane.

The Metropolitan Police officer was part of a surveillance team which had followed a target from London to Kent. The officers were in two cars.

'Directly at me'

Jurors heard he had received numerous driving courses in the police, and had 15 years' experience in driving high-performance cars for surveillance purposes.

Prosecutors had argued Pc Brown's car was straddling the central white line prior to the collision
But giving evidence, the officer said he thought Miss Austin's car was in the middle of the road as if she was trying to overtake the car in front.
Describing the crash, he said: "I don't think I had time to steer at all or brake. It was that quick."

Miss Austin, 29, a pre-school worker and mother of three boys, was on her way home to Hadlow and was driving at 14mph. She was pronounced dead at the scene. :(

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-11992431

ms hope

15-12-2010, 10:21 PM

KCC - Statistics on LAC ICO RUN FOSTER ADOPT

14 December 2010
Dear Kent County Council,

Thank you for accepting my FOI Request. I would like the following
information:

For each year: 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010

The number of Looked After Children, by gender (male / female /
other)

1) who left Local Authority Care
2) where a County Court ordered the discharge of care
3) where a District Court ordered the discharge of care
4) where the High Court ordered the discharge of care
5) where the Supreme Court, Court of Appeal or higher Court ordered
discharge of care
6) where an ICO expired and was not renewed
7) where the Local Authority withdraw an ICO
8) returned by Local Authority to their birth parents
9) returned of their own choice to their birth parents
10) returned to extended family of their own choice
11) returned to extended family of the Local Authorities Choice
12) did not return to their birth parents by the Local Authorities
choice
13) did not return to their birth parents by their own choice
14) actively sought out their parents during care
15) before leaving care, had no contact with their birth parents
a) for part or the whole of 1 month
b) for 2 to 4 months
c) for 5 to 6 months
d) for 6 to 10 months
e) for 1 year
f) for most of 2 years
16) ran away from foster care
17) ran away from adoptive parents
18) ran away from birth parents
19) ran away from extended family
20) when running away, returned to birth parents
21) when running away, returned to extended family
22) when running away, returned to a previous foster carers
23) did not wish to return to the care immediately before running
away
24) placed into foster care
a) within the Local Authority Area
b) in an immediately joining Local Authority Area
c) outside the Local Authority or Adjoining Area, but within the UK
d) outside the UK
25) adopted
a) within the Local Authority Area
b) an immediately adjoining Local Authority Area
c) outside the immediate and adjoining areas but within the UK
d) outside the UK
26) made a claim that the child was at any time during or after
being in care
a) physically abused within Local Authority care
b) emotionally abused within Local Authority care
c) sexually abused within Local Authority care
d) neglected within Local Authority care
27) died whilst in care
28) died from self harm whilst in care that was not a
characteristic of the child prior to care
29) died from self harm whilst in care that was a characteristic of
the child prior to care

For children in each of the age groups:

0-4 years
5 years
6 years
7 years
8 years
9 years
10 years
11 years
12 years
13 years
14 years
15 years
16 years
17 years or older

Maidstone Borough Council staff & cllrs are very concerned at what is happening to families and children ,many support Cllr Williams although she may not believe this to be the case, in her efforts to support her grandchildren who continue to suffer at the hands of KCC. She spoke out at a scrutiny committee about the abuses within our own council against children after she had been asked to state her reasons to be able to grant a child a free place on a holiday playscheme(Hotfoot) from her devolved budget, and asked to complete a social services referral form on these children which sort her opinion on these families. She refused.(but the webcast was not be working and the minutes removed). Common Purpose is alive and well in Maidstone but no cllr or staff dares to mention it.

Hounded by the Conservatives to stand,it is well known that she wasn’t even a member when she was first elected and only put up as a paper candidate. The common purpose lead Kent Messenger wont print the fact that she resigned from the Conservative Party because of the abuses of her own granddaughters within Kent including the finger printing of young children in school for their library system without parental consent, which she raised with everybody including Paul Carter and leader at Maidstone.

Common knowledge that Eric Hotson the now deputy mayor forged paperwork that suggested that she had joined the Conservative Party when she had only signed for herself . KCC Paul Carter lied to her bare faced when confronted with the truth about not following correct procedures with her grandchildren and others, she was threatened with being labelled mad if she went to the press. She was told outright by the then leader of the Tories Eric Hotson that she could not raise Forced Adoption at the so-called scrutiny meetings which are in any case officer led and a complete waste of time and money, So much for being able to raise any issue.

The only crime she has been guilty of is caring previously for her granddaughters and pointing out the lack of support being offered to families by KCC, taking KCC to the LGO on educational matters of children being forced to go to school aged 4, objecting to biometric finger printing of children as young as 4 without parental consent including her own daughter at Loose Infant School. The governor of Loose Junior School and Greenfield’s Infants School who both introduced the system is Alan Chell a detested KCC cllr who had previously covered the backs of social workers when they had not followed correct procedures witnessed by Cllr Marion Ring concerning the abuse of families including the abuse of funds and lack of financial support.

There has been and is a very personal vendetta against Cllr Williams both prior to and after her election by KCC and many but not all of the Tories who run it.

Europe tells Britain to justify itself over fingerprinting children in schools
The European Commission has demanded Britain justifies the widespread and routine fingerprinting of children in schools because of "significant concerns" that the policy breaks EU privacy laws.

In May, the incoming Conservative and Liberal Democrat coalition promise to "outlaw the fingerprinting of children at school without parental permission". A government spokesman was not available yesterday to comment on the commission's letter. :rolleyes:

On Christmas Eve 2010, at 10pm in the UK and around the World , tens of thousands of Chinese lanterns will be launched into free flight in a symbolic gesture of defiance to the shroud of secrecy that envelopes the plague of State-sanctioned child snatching and Human trafficking.

Join us and spread the message that this evil crime will no longer pass unnoticed! :)

Cafcass and Coram in South East Partnership for Children
Cafcass, the organisation that looks after children’s interests in the family courts, and children’s charity, Coram, are pleased to announce an innovative partnership between a government agency and a voluntary organisation.
The partnership will operate in South East England and is designed to promote better outcomes for children whose parents are divorcing or separating and cannot agree on contact or which parent a child should live with. Coram will be supporting Cafcass practitioners in a number of ways. The charity will provide specialist additional consultation in child and adolescent psychiatry and adult psychology.
Cafcass Chief Executive Anthony Douglas said: “We are constantly striving to improve the quality of outcomes for children and young people. By working in partnership with Coram we will be harnessing their excellent reputation in the arena of contact – especially in achieving successful sessions with families where there is entrenched discord.”

Now how many times has this judge previously worked on behalf of for the local authority, it would be very interesting to know how many involved children ?

Why are not all judges figures made completely transparent to the public where children lives are concerned, what could they possibly have to hide?:rolleyes:

http://uksocialservices.com/name-and-shame/

[ Responsible along with Kent county council with the theft of Elle-May, Ruby, Lacey & Poppy Williams-Piper for forced adoption (Lacey & Poppy forced adoption due for completion at the end of the month) ; granddaughters of Sheena Williams (former Conservative Maidstone borough councillor) who dared to raise concerns about forced adoption/lack of support by SS and the bio-metric fingerprinting of children in school without parental consent ]

1st September 2008 designated Family Law Judge for Kent His Honour Judge Polden (second from the right) used to be a practising partner in a local Kent firm of solicitors...anyone spot a conflict of interest ?
scroll down to the bottom
http://www.resolution.org.uk/kent/news/

Sheena speaks at the UK Rally Against Child Abuse 2010

YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

ms hope

11-01-2011, 11:02 PM

[ Responsible along with Kent county council with the theft of Elle-May, Ruby, Lacey & Poppy Williams-Piper for forced adoption (Lacey & Poppy forced adoption due for completion at the end of the month) ; granddaughters of Sheena Williams (former Conservative Maidstone borough councillor) who dared to raise concerns about forced adoption/lack of support by SS and the bio-metric fingerprinting of children in school without parental consent ]

1st September 2008 designated Family Law Judge for Kent His Honour Judge Polden (second from the right) used to be a practising partner in a local Kent firm of solicitors...anyone spot a conflict of interest ?
scroll down to the bottom
http://www.resolution.org.uk/kent/news/

Sheena speaks at the UK Rally Against Child Abuse 2010

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ApaElxYGFyo

Paul Carter – (Conservative ) Leader of Kent County Council

Langley Park House
Langley
Maidstone
Kent
ME17 3NQ

01622-861131

ms hope

11-01-2011, 11:34 PM

Honours List: Order of the British Empire, :rolleyes:
Friday, 31 December 2010

Leyland Bradshaw Ridings. Lead Council Member for Children's Services, Kent County Council. For services to Local Government. (Sandwich, Kent)

Thank you for your request for information made under the Freedom of
Information Act 2000.

We have answered your questions in the order that they have been raised

1. We do not hold this information in the format requested.

2. This information is not held centrally or on any database. We would
need to refer out to our district teams to locate this information, who
would have to trawl through their manual records. We estimate that to
extrapolate and collate the information required to answer this question
would involve more than 18 hours work, which at the £25 hourly rate set
by the Ministry of Justice, would exceed the £450 cost limit. Therefore,
under section 12 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000, we are not
obliged to comply and are exercising our right to refuse to answer this
question.

New registrations as Childminders for 2009 - 2010 was £33,591 in
start up grants and £1,182 for briefing sessions to support
registration as a childminder

8. This information is not held centrally or on any database. We would
need to refer out to our district teams to locate this information, who
would have to trawl through their manual records. We estimate that to
extrapolate and collate the information required to answer this question
would involve more than 18 hours work, which at the £25 hourly rate set
by the Ministry of Justice, would exceed the £450 cost limit. Therefore,
under section 12 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000, we are not
obliged to comply and are exercising our right to refuse to answer this
question.

9. This information is not held centrally or on any database. We would
need to refer out to our district teams to locate this information, who
would have to trawl through their manual records. We estimate that to
extrapolate and collate the information required to answer this question
would involve more than 18 hours work, which at the £25 hourly rate set
by the Ministry of Justice, would exceed the £450 cost limit. Therefore,
under section 12 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000, we are not
obliged to comply and are exercising our right to refuse to answer this
question.

For my most precious grand-daughter Ruby ( Williams-Piper) on her 7th birthday

‘you are the light, you hold the light, the light is with you always’

The light is held within the heart and you are in mine forever

My Love for you is Eternal , Endless, Everlasting

Nanny XXX

[former CON/IND - Maidstone Borough Councillor]

http://uksocialservices.com/name-and-shame/

ms hope

16-06-2011, 01:33 PM

This is very naughty stopping someone who wants to stand for election from doing so :rolleyes: just make sure they are locked up at the time, bribery, corruption what ever next, anyone would think they have something to hide:mad:

Corruption Corruption and even more Corruption ???
http://bignewsmargate.blogspot.com/

‘What the Kent Conservatives and others would prefer was kept hidden and you will never get to find out in the local media or on the BBC
Kent is definitely a hotbed of corruption according to this, a whistleblower locked up to stop her standing for elections and MP’s, Kent Police, HMCS, NHS all involved in cover ups ?; How many more are being persecuted by Kent’s corrupt criminal cabal ? How much corruption has been kept hidden from the public gaze and when will people say enough is enough, after all we are the one’s who are paying for it ??? ‘

Vicky Haig and others speak truth to power
Vicky Haig and others speak truth to power - YouTube

ms hope

19-06-2011, 09:10 PM

This is very naughty stopping someone who wants to stand for election from doing so :rolleyes: just make sure they are locked up at the time, bribery, corruption what ever next, anyone would think they have something to hide:mad:

Corruption Corruption and even more Corruption ???
http://bignewsmargate.blogspot.com/

‘What the Kent Conservatives and others would prefer was kept hidden and you will never get to find out in the local media or on the BBC
Kent is definitely a hotbed of corruption according to this, a whistleblower locked up to stop her standing for elections and MP’s, Kent Police, HMCS, NHS all involved in cover ups ?; How many more are being persecuted by Kent’s corrupt criminal cabal ? How much corruption has been kept hidden from the public gaze and when will people say enough is enough, after all we are the one’s who are paying for it ??? ‘

Vicky Haig and others speak truth to power
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vC06YQ12dMg

http://www.sharonkilby.co.uk/id164.html

YOLANDE ANN LINDRIDGE

Yolande is another victim of Domestic Violence, battling for justice in Kent’s corrupt courts. She is also doing battle with the corrupt medical establishment. She is up against the usual Masonic dirty tricks within all the authorities and courts and was even forced to spend Christmas 2003 in Holloway prison. Take a look at some of her writings and official documentation; her petition outlines more recent events.

Petition 6.5.2010

PTSD - HOLLOWAY PRISON

LAUREN AND TOM HOME ALONE LAST CHRISTMAS, YOLANDE IN HOLLOWAY PRISON

THE IDENTITY OF UNCONVICTED PAEDOPHILES ON THE OPERATION ORE LIST

DID LORD HOFFMAN BRING BLUNKETT DOWN?

LINDRIDGE V PECK 7/1/03

Lindridge V Peck 10th January 2003

LINDRIDGE V PECK 21/1/03

3 RAPE & CONSPIRACY TAPES 14/3/03

LINDRIDGE V PECK 6/6/03

MAIDSTONE COUNTY COURT 6/6/03

KM 8/9/03

GMC 26/10/03

LORD FALCONER 18/11/03

GMC SHIPMAN 18/11/03

D I GARY SMITH 19/11/03

JUDICIAL REVIEW

CRUELTY BEYOND BELIEF

COURT OF APPEAL - HOFFMAN 5/4/04

KENT CPS 13/5/04

SHIPMAN INQUIRY 11/12/04

GMC 13/12/04

MEREDIAN - STUART RUMBLE 17/12/04

KENT CPS 17/12/04

ATTORNEY GENERAL 17/12/04

KENT MASONS CONSPIRING TO ROB AND CONSPIRING TO DEFRAUD 23/3/05

:mad::mad::mad:

ms hope

21-06-2011, 12:39 PM

Brian Gerrish -Thursday 23 June Kent Freedom Movement Talk :)

Everyone who can get there please do , Brian will be covering 'corruption' and the secret closed family courts which are stealing children for forced adoption !

A Maidstone Lodge received its warrant on 13.9.2000, it was set up to protect freemasons on the Kent Operation Ore List. The leading lodges are in Maidstone ie Douglas Lodge 1725 (meeting in a Church) supported by Maeides Stana Lodge 7868.

NB This document was composed on 1.12.2003, the unlawful arrest and imprisonment of its author was ordered on 19.12.2003 and was achieved on 22.12.2003. On its anniversary ie 22.12.2004 a list of un-convicted paedophiles on the Operation Ore list will be published. The author has been threatened with imprisonment by the High Court if she continues to pursue the paedophiles identified in HQ020X02379 ie Yolande Lindridge v Kent Operation Ore Organised Crime.

http://www.sharonkilby.co.uk/id167.html

ms hope

22-06-2011, 12:01 PM

The temps paid up to £1,250 a day by council that’s slashing hundreds of jobs (that's three times David Cameron's daily wage) :mad:

KENT COUNTY COUNCIL

A council forced to cut services and slash hundreds of jobs has been paying up to £1,250 a day each for six temporary staff.

They were brought in at Kent County Council to replace directors who were made redundant, but are now earning up to three times Prime Minister David Cameron’s daily wage.

The temps, who have cost the taxpayer £205,000 in their first three months, were hired by the Tory-run council’s group managing director, Katherine Kerswell, who joined the authority last year on an annual salary of £197,000.

She is overseeing huge cutbacks, including the loss of 1,500 jobs, in a bid to reduce the council’s budget by £165million over the next two years.
The most highly-paid temp is families and care director Malcolm Newsam, who costs the council £1,250 a day, followed by Alastair Pettigrew, head of specialist children’s services, £825 a day, then Andy Roberts in the education and learning department, £780 a day.

And in civil law cases, the best-paid legal aid barristers – one made nearly £600,000 – were experts in divorce and child law in the secretive family courts.

Earnings from legal aid among barristers are now such that one in every 30 of Britain’s 15,000 barristers earns more than Mr Cameron’s annual £142,500.

Martin Narey has been commissioned for a flat fee of £18,000 to
undertake research to investigate how the Council can significantly
increase the number of adoptions in Kent.:mad:

Martin Narey was Chief Executive of Barnardos for 5 years and is the
Ministerial Adviser for Adoption. :rolleyes: The number of adopters in Kent
and across the country has declined in recent years and requires a radical
rethink. An average foster care placement costs approximately Â£35k per
annum, and the outcomes for children in care are poor. Increasing our
adoption rates would, in the Cabinet Member for Specialist Children's
Services view,:rolleyes: lead to massive financial savings and better outcomes for
vulnerable children. Mr Narey is due to present his report and
recommendations at a full County Council meeting on 20 October 2011.

4. Who are your external lawyers and how much do you pay per
year for managemenet advice, special assignments and tax advice? KCC's
Legal Services buy specialist advice from external lawyers through various
Chambers, particularly for child care cases. Last year, Legal spent
£1,506,496 :eek: on advice from over 600 different lawyers

I've been reading about the issues of family courts for years - the questions about the power being brought to bear and forced adoptions.

Too many people with similar stories for it all to be completely made up, it's obviously happening.

But I can't understand the motive. Money can't be the deal here - the money is just pushed by the govt from above. So what is their motive. Why is all this happening.

ms hope

30-09-2011, 01:40 PM

Blowing The Whistle - Child Stealing By The State :)
Event Date:
Sun, 23rd Oct 2011
Start Time:
10:30AM
Location
Kings Hall
Off Glebe Street
Stoke On Trent ST4 1FT
See map: Google Maps
This is not a conference to discuss the "issues" and "concerns" with children, and to set out a way to "help reform the system", as some MPs suggest.
This is a conference to expose and bring to trial those helping the State to steal and abuse children. We will name names, departments, authorities, organisations, judges, MPs, police, psychiatrists and more. With the help of those attending, we will expose the real evidence for:
MASSIVE STATE SPONSORED CHILD ABUSE AND TRAFFICKING AND COVER UP BY THE STATE AND ITS AGENTS

Brian Gerrish talking about the corruption of children, childrens services, star chamber family courts, dodgy politicians and much much more ! :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PIWR9pGy-3U

Please read updated info ; Brian Gerrish
Child Stealing Event :)

http://www.ukcolumn.org/events/blowing-whistle-child-stealing-state

ms hope

04-10-2011, 03:08 PM

Martin Narey was Chief Executive of Barnardos for 5 years and is the
Ministerial Adviser for Adoption. :mad:The number of adopters in Kent and
across the country has declined in recent years and requires a radical
overhaul. An average foster care placement costs approximately Â£35k per
annum, and the outcomes for children in care are poor. Increasing our
adoption rates would, in the Cabinet Member for Specialist Children's
Services view, lead to massive financial savings for Kent taxpayers and
better outcomes for vulnerable children who would be placed in stable
family environments rather than left to languish in care.

Mr Narey has been commissioned for a flat fee of Â£18,000 to undertake
research to investigate how the Council can significantly increase the
number of adoptions in Kent. He has not yet completed his work but
anticipates it will take approximately 24 days. :mad:

Jenny Whittle is the Cabinet Member for Specialist Children's Services.
http://www.kent.gov.uk/your_council/how_the_council_works/who_does_what/cabinet_members/jenny_whittle.aspx

“Jenny Whittle was employed by KCC from August 2005 until January 2009.
Her initial role was as Staff Officer to the Cabinet Members for
Education, when Mr Carter was one of those Cabinet Members, and she
subsequently became the Leader's Staff Officer, three months after Mr Carter was elected to that post. She resigned from KCC less than 24 hours after becoming the Candidate, following the legal requirements as contained in the County Council's constitution.

Paul Carter did not provide any reference in his capacity as Leader of Kent County Council.”

“if Paul Carter did provide Ms Whittle with a reference, it was not in his capacity as Leader of the Council.

However, even though there is no obligation to do so, I have asked the Leader to comment on your request. :rolleyes:In order to satisfy public interest and
accountability, he confirms that as President of Faversham & Mid Kent
Conservative Association, he did provide Ms Whittle with a reference.

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/conservative_leader_paul_carter

wonder why they just couldnt say so :rolleyes:

It is paramount that if Paul Carter who is so willing to state that
he is not a member of the Freemason,cannot state directly whether
or not he put in a reference of support in order that Jenny Whittle
ex-employee , who he obviously knows extremely well,could become
selected for one of the safest Conservative seats in the
country,then the obvious conclusion is that he did.

It clearly does matter, as he is both the Leader of KCC and the
President of Faversham & Mid Kent Conservative Association.

Frankly to suggest this is a vexatious request is ridiculous,
especially when you waited till after the election, obviously to
ensure that both Jenny whittle & Paul Carter had been
elected/re-elected.

1. How many internationally qualified social workers have you appointed
over the last three years? Kent County Council has employed 101 qualified
social workers.
2. How many such social workers have left your Department? 19
3. How many do you employ at the present time? 82

5. If such social workers are on time limited contracts or have time
limited immigration status do you have any plans to replace them and, if
so, what are they?

The American social workers have a time limited work permit/certificate of
sponsorship which expires 2013. The requirement for such workers, and
whether to retain them, will be assessed before this point against
business need and the prevailing job market.

A local authority has lost its appeal over being ordered to pay a grandmother the same rate as a foster carer for looking after her granddaughter.
In the case of SA, R v Kent County Council [2011] EWCA Civ 1303 the grandmother was approached by Kent’s social services department around Christmas 2004. She was told that her then 10-year-old granddaughter – being cared for at the time by her mother – would be put into care unless she agreed to look after her.

The grandmother agreed. She received £63.56 a week for looking after the girl, compared to the £146.23 weekly that the average foster parent receives.

The local authority justified the differential on the basis that it was a private arrangement between the mother and the grandmother. This decision was challenged by way of judicial review.

In the High Court, Mrs Justice Black ruled in favour of the claimant, saying that – on an examination of the facts – the presence of the grandmother did not enable Kent to “side-step” its s. 20(1) duty under the Children Act 1989. That duty had come into existence and the council then discharged it by a placement under s. 23(2) rather than s. 23(6), the judge said.
Mrs Justice Black ordered Kent to give the grandmother the same support as a foster carer and to make back payments. She also gave Kent permission to appeal.

The Court of Appeal last week rejected the local authority’s arguments. Giving the lead judgment, Lord Justice Ward said the issue at the heart of the appeal was money.

He said: “Making financial provision for children being looked after by local authorities under the Children Act 1989 is expensive. Not surprisingly, local authorities are keen to trim their obligations to the minimum possible.”
The judge cited statistics produced by the Department of Education, in March 2010, which showed that 64,400 children were being looked after by local authorities in England. Of these, 38,200 were subject to interim or full care orders and 21,200 were in voluntary placements under s. 20 of the Children Act.

The key legal issue was whether the child in SA was a child being looked after by the local authority as that phrase is defined under s. 22 of the Act – "whether, as a matter of law, a child who is not the subject of an interim care order can be a looked after child where she goes to live with a relative in circumstances where the local authority is involved in setting up and funding the arrangement."

Lord Justice Ward and Lord Justice Rimer said Mrs Justice Black had been entitled to find as she did – i.e. that the local authority had placed the girl with her grandmother pursuant to s. 23(2) of the 1989 Act and that it followed that the girl remained a ‘looked after’ child within the meaning of s. 22(1). Kent’s appeal was dismissed.
A spokesman for the council said the authority accepted the judgment and would not be challenging it.

He insisted that the council recognised and valued the important role that families and friends can have in supporting children and young people who are unable to live with their birth parents.
The spokesman said the council had played a leading role in discussions with the Department of Education as to the best way of providing support for family and friend carers.

He added: "Following recent changes in national legislation and guidance, the council consulted with a voluntary group, which supported family and friend carers, and revised the way children and young people are supported, when living in this kind of arrangement.

"Yesterday's judgement was on a case that predated the changes in legislation and has clarified an important legal point about the then arrangements. Kent County Council accepts the judgement and will not be challenging it."

The grandmother’s lawyer, Nigel Priestley of Huddersfield law firm Ridley & Hall, said: “Local authorities across the country have been waiting for this decision. They were roaring Kent on from the terraces. It will be a major blow to them that Kent lost 3:0!

“We’re delighted with the outcome. The county council argued that they had no duty to the child even though their fingerprints were all over the case. Kent put forward the radical suggestion that it had no significant financial duty to a child they had placed with a relative. They denied that she should be treated as a ‘looked after’ child. The judge rejected this argument. The Court of Appeal agreed with her.”

Priestley claimed that it was a landmark case, adding that it would cost Kent “a five-figure sum” in legal costs and back payments. “It has implications for many children Kent has placed with relatives,” he said. “Many carers will be losing out. That’s why Kent wanted to appeal the decision.”

The Ridley & Hall lawyer argued that the grandmother’s situation was not unusual in England and Wales. “Because of a shortage of foster carers, ‘kinship’ carers are increasingly being used,” he said. “However, local authorities are not supporting them appropriately.”

Lynn Chesterman, Chief Executive of the Grandparents Association, said: “Too often, as in this case, grandparents are struggling to cope financially – living on a pension and bringing up children. They simply do not have enough money to live on. I hope that Kent has learnt its lesson – and that other councils start taking their responsibilities seriously.”

Kent council among worst in UK for losing vital information :rolleyes:

Kent County Council has been ranked the second worst authority in the UK for losing sensitive and personal information - including details of children.

According to research from the civil liberties campaign group Big Brother Watch, in the past three years the council has had 72 cases of data being lost or stolen.

These include:

Scanned case notes relating to children found on Facebook. It contained information that would identify individuals
An outreach worker who lost a memory stick travelling from one school to another. It contained personal data of 30 pupils from 16 schools including assessment results
A 2010 diary which was left on top of a car. It contained details of appointments with clients
A social worker's car broken into, containing a laptop and diary holding client information
A child's report sent to the wrong set of parents
CSS child protection team faxed information, containing sensitive personal data about a child, to the wrong NHS team
An email plus attachment sent by the Learning Disability Team to the wrong recipient. It contained sensitive personal data about a client
A primary school sent unsuccessful application emails copying all other unsuccessful applicants in
An individual's NHS records found behind a desk. This included immunisation records and schools attended
A laptop carrier left on a car roof containing information about social care contracts

According to the report, Buckinghamshire came out as the worst authority, with Essex placed below Kent in third place.

Almost all local authorities responded to the Freedom of Information request, which covered loss of personal information by council employees and contractors between August 3 2008 and August 3 2011.

The records, which should have been kept in a dedicated storage area, were put in a disposal room due to lack of space.

The records were then mistakenly removed from the room and destroyed.

The hospital failed to realise the information was missing for three months.

David Smith, from the Information Commission's Office, addressed the latest local authority blunders.

But he said the blame should lie with individuals.

He added: "There is an element of individual members of staff being careless, but it's the lack of proper training for them.

"Storing data on memory sticks and laptops is a real problem."

A Kent County Council spokesman said it was no surprise the authority came out close to the top in the survey, as it was the largest shire county.

But he added: "Clearly, we would look at each case individually and take appropriate action depending on the severity of the case, which could include dismissal.

"We have a robust information security incident protocol in place, so consequently we log, monitor and investigate all reports of any alleged security breaches, regardless of cause or eventual outcome."

The spokesman said some of the incidents were beyond employees' control, such as in cases of theft.

"We are continually monitoring our procedures to make sure we have the correct policies in place to be able to deal with such incidents of personal data being lost, stolen or shared inappropriately."

'Pie n Mash films' believe in 'telling it like it is' and Bill and Lilly are well known figures in the truth movement.

Bill will be talking about his latest work in helping to reveal abuse of children and help with parents when their children have been taken away from them unlawfully and Bill is tireless in his support for these people who would not normally get a voice.

Is delivering the UKcolumn to council offices a terrorist activity ?‏‏:mad:

Can you for the record state under what lawful authority Kent Police operates and if you follow without exception The Police Code of Conduct.

Dear Kent Police

Please provide the following under freedom of information:

Kent Police Authority Oaths – The Police Code of Conduct

Were the three Kent Police Officers badge numbers 12692, 12078,
10091 working according to the oaths they took as police constables
on the evening of 6th February 2012 when they stopped a Freelander
belonging to former Maidstone Borough Cllr Sheena:Williams (not a
public servant) outside Kent County Council County hall offices,
after her partner had delivered the independent newpaper the
UKColumn to Maidstone Borough Council offices.

( Having previously complained of alarm & distress at the hands of
plain clothed Kent Police Officers, who arrived unannounced at her
home and failed to provide any identification, after she had cause
to complain about Kent County Council children services)

What are the names and ranks of the 3 officers; initially a female
officer number12692 and male officer number 12078 and later in
attendance male officer number 10091

As Kent County Council has already admitted they operate under
their own authority.

Quote : ‘It therefore acts under its own authority’

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/un...

Can you for the record state under what lawful authority Kent
Police operates and if you follow without exception The Police Code
of Conduct.

Is delivering the UKcolumn to council offices a terrorist activity ?‏‏:mad:

Can you for the record state under what lawful authority Kent Police operates and if you follow without exception The Police Code of Conduct.

Dear Kent Police

Please provide the following under freedom of information:

Kent Police Authority Oaths – The Police Code of Conduct

Were the three Kent Police Officers badge numbers 12692, 12078,
10091 working according to the oaths they took as police constables
on the evening of 6th February 2012 when they stopped a Freelander
belonging to former Maidstone Borough Cllr Sheena:Williams (not a
public servant) outside Kent County Council County hall offices,
after her partner had delivered the independent newpaper the
UKColumn to Maidstone Borough Council offices.

( Having previously complained of alarm & distress at the hands of
plain clothed Kent Police Officers, who arrived unannounced at her
home and failed to provide any identification, after she had cause
to complain about Kent County Council children services)

What are the names and ranks of the 3 officers; initially a female
officer number12692 and male officer number 12078 and later in
attendance male officer number 10091

As Kent County Council has already admitted they operate under
their own authority.

Quote : ‘It therefore acts under its own authority’

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/un...

Can you for the record state under what lawful authority Kent
Police operates and if you follow without exception The Police Code
of Conduct.

This is the first ever web chat hosted by the Chief Constable and gives local people the chance to have their questions answered directly, from the comfort of their home.

Chief Constable Learmonth said: 'I'm really keen to talk directly with the county's residents and hope this web chat makes it easy for people to make observations and ask me questions about policing in Kent.

'We continue to explore different ways of working with the people of Kent and this is a good way for the public to get involved without even having to leave their home.' :rolleyes:

http://www.kent.police.uk/news/online_meetings/120213_chief.html

This does sounds a bit like Question Time they pick who can be there and what questions can be asked.

Shouldn’t one of the first questions be freemasons and common purpose graduates must all be made to declare, as both operate in secrecy which most would find abhorrent in a public service, if we are ever to receive transparent services ?

Here is a list of some of the Kent Police common purpose graduates there could be many more , how would we know?

I would like, under the Freedom of Information Act for information
on action taken when a Children’s social worker who persistently
fails in the following. Complaints to the GSCC and LGO have been
exhausted. All have failed to acknowledge evidence, or take into
account the law, what would the next steps be in the following
questions?

1. Failing to follow public law, even when pointed out to them they
are in breach of the law and some examples of their actions listed
below.
a. Act beyond their powers.
b. Ignore relevant information.
c. Fail to undertake a sufficient enquiry.
d. Mislead professionals.
e. Clearly showing biasness towards one parent.
f. Not informing a parent what the case is against them.
g. Not taking into account evidence or factors which he or she was
not aware of.
h. Not allowing the individual to put his or her case forward.
i. Not giving the individual the facilities to put his or her case
forward.
j. Refusing to hear evidence that may have led to a different
decision.
k. Denying access to relevant documents.
l. Holding a hearing in the absence of the individual when they had
good reason for not being able to attend.
m. Changing the time / date / location of a hearing and failing to
inform the individual or failing to notify the individual of the
time and place of the hearing that would lead to the decision being
taken.
n. Record keeping being grossly inaccurate, cheery picking
evidence, falsifying evidence.
o. Social Workers attempt to cover up mistakes that they or other
team members have made in the past.
p. Bullying or intimidating a service user with the removal of
their children to remain silent on social services past mistakes,
making complaints or highlighting any of the above.

2. Failing to follow the Children’s Act, even when pointed out to
them they are in breach of the law and some examples of their
actions listed below.
a. Failing to put the best interests of the child first.
b. Failing in the due of care towards a child.
c. Ignoring or showing no concerns of either imminent or future
risk towards a child.
d. Ignoring professional advice or concerns.
e. Ignoring parents / family or friend’s advice or concerns

3. If a social worker or social services had, ignored professionals
/ service users and failed in their duty of care to a child and the
risk came to light by another social services, would this be
grounds to instigate a Serious Case Review. Would it be justified
of social services or a social worker to carrying out any of the
items listed in Q1 or Q2 against a service user to keep quiet?

4. What is the next course of action when LA have no concerns,
refuse to satisfactory answer complaints, refuse to look at
evidence.
5. What is the next course of action when GSCC have no concerns,
refuse to satisfactory answer complaints, refuse to look at
evidence.
6. What is the next course of action when LGO have no concerns,
refuse to satisfactory answer complaints, refuse to look at
evidence.
7. What action would be taken if LA refused to act on guidelines /
policy / recommendations by OFSTED, LGO, GSCC.
8. What action would be taken if LA refused to act on guidelines /
policy / recommendations by professionals?
9. Please can you supply statistics for the last 5 years where
concerns or complaints have been raised on a social worker within
your borough (either other staff or service users) for any of the
above? Please supply information on any action taken, outcomes, no
further action or passed to GSCC to investigate. Please give
reasons why.
10. Have any of the social workers, over the last 5, years had two
or more concerns or complaints made against them, as per Q6, from
unrelated service users or staff. By this I mean the individuals
that raised complaints were not related.
11. What course of action would be taken if a social worker refused
to answer emails, or questions?
12. If all service users agreed, would the LA set up a support
group for all service users who have had dealings with social
services. i.e. give out leaflets to service users or inform them of
support network meetings run by other service users. (Similar to
Women’s Aid coffee mornings)
13. We acknowledge that GSCC is responsible for the conduct of a
social worker, but have no authority over social services as a
whole, therefore proving difficult to bring a case of misconduct
over a particular social worker. Please can you tell us who is
responsible for the conduct of social services?

Another former Conservative councillor Lucy Allan ,who was on David Cameron's select list for MP , who fortunately got to keep her son.

"Twice a month, she sat on the local fostering panel, which oversaw the removal of children from their parents and placed them with new families.

It was heart-rending work, as she recalls. ‘At each fostering meeting we were presented with horrifying cases of abusive parents, almost always depicted as “substance abusers”, mentally unstable or “unable to put the needs of their children over their own needs”

The 'experts' who break up families: The terrifying story of the prospective MP branded an unfit mother by experts who'd never met her - a nightmare shared by many other families

( Lucky she had a spare £10,000 and probably hadn't been raising other issues such as the treatment of families by the SS , Contact Point child database and finger printing of children in schools without parental consent etc like former Maidstone Conservative Sheena Williams who refused to have psychological testing, whose 4 granddaughters were stolen for forced adoptions.) :rolleyes:

Sheena speaks at the UK Rally Against Child Abuse 2010 - YouTube

nwonow

31-03-2012, 01:02 PM

We will soon be changing the site to enable us to publically give
reasons for bans. In the last 3 years we have only had to take this
action of last resort for 12 people out of 12,000 registered users.

Kind regards
Alex - WhatDoTheyKnow.com volunteer

Google "site:whatdotheyknow.com suspended" and you get 51,700 hits, so the number of bans seems to have increased a lot in the past 2 years.

ms hope

18-04-2012, 11:28 PM

Adoption tsar Martin Narey: I do listen to social workers

My proposals for a swifter assessment process for adopters grew directly from the time I spent in Kent.

HE SPENT MORE THAN 8 WEEKS INSIDE 20 LOCAL AUTHORITIES AND VOLUNTARY ADOPTION AGENCIES ....

Children stolen by the state needlessly, causing utter misery in one of Britain's most disturbing scandals
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2128987/Children-stolen-state.html

Christopher Booker's excellent articles in The Telegraph did not allow comments.Now he has written on the subject of child stealing in the Daily Mail, comments have been allowed, albeit a meagre 204 when thousands, if not millions have been affected. Where is their voice?

These brave former councillors have got it about right!!

"I note that Brian Gerrish was the first to mention" Child Stealing by the State" he should have copyrighted it. No one wanted to accept it, what are they thinking now? Brian said this at least 3 years ago!! Well done Brian Gerrish for being the first to talk about this and get the word out, its only taken the media 3 years. I believe ex councillor Sheena Williams from Kent brought this to Brians attention when her Grandchildren were stollen by Conservative Lead Kent County Council. I am also a survivor of the secretive satanic child stealing system. Sheenas Grandchildren were stolen in 2008, I went through the horror in 2003, we have been lobbying MP's for many years to no avail, The media would not touch our story, too strong, we could have stopped this corruption and destruction of innocent families years ago. Now we all want these children that have been stolen by the state back, NOW. The forced adotions are unlawful and criminal. MP's have known about this since at least 2002!!"

- Yvonne Stewart-Taylor, Kendal, 13/4/2012 1:01

http://www.ukcolumn.org/forum/child-stealing-state/pats-news-thread

dolores1

22-04-2012, 12:30 PM

I find my copy of UK Column invaluable.

I ahve got others to get it also and mine does the rounds.

ms hope

17-05-2012, 06:32 PM

I find my copy of UK Column invaluable.

I ahve got others to get it also and mine does the rounds.

:) hopefully they are getting the message;)

ms hope

17-05-2012, 06:34 PM

It takes 4 years just to report this – why bother now ? :rolleyes:

Paul Carter pay error costs Kent County Council £20,000
Council leader Paul Carter said his secretary noticed his overdraft was near its limit

Human error is being blamed for a mix-up over payments to Kent County Council (KCC) leader Paul Carter which cost the authority more than £20,000.
Allowances of £21,398 intended for Mr Carter for a period of seven months were paid by mistake to a maintenance fitter with the same name.
KCC managed to recover only £769 from the other Paul Carter, who worked at Aylesford Commercial Services Depot.
The council said the employee left the UK and it had been unable to trace him.

The payments were made in error to the maintenance man, then aged 54, from September 2007 to March 2008.
KCC said the mistake arose when a member of staff inadvertently entered a change of bank details from leader Paul Carter on to Commercial Services Paul Carter's record.

'Not quite right' :rolleyes:

It was discovered in April 2008 when the council leader's secretary in his private office noticed that his overdraft was near its limit.
"My secretary and my own office suggested to me that I needed to rein back on expenditure," said the council leader.

The other Paul Carter is now believed to be in Eastern Europe
"Clearly, things weren't quite right and I asked her to check that my allowance for being leader of Kent County Council had hit my personal bank account and it hadn't.

"It was a payroll error within KCC. Clearly there was an employee of the authority by the name of Paul Carter and my allowance was mistakenly paid into the other Paul Carter's account."

KCC said that as soon as the error was identified, it deducted £769 from maintenance man Paul Carter's net monthly salary of £1,600, but was unable to recover the rest of the money because he resigned and left the country.
He is now believed to be in Eastern Europe.

"KCC always undertake to fully recover any overpayment made via the payroll regardless of whether the individual remains employed or not," it said.
"In this case we followed our normal procedure and informed Debt Recovery to continue with the full recovery of the debt.

"Unfortunately Mr Carter left the country and we have been unable to trace him. :rolleyes:

"We will still continue to re-establish full recovery of this debt if possible.

Former Councillor’s Sheena Williams from Kent and Yvonne Stewart-Taylor from Cumbria listen from about 41 minutes .

UK Column Live - 18th October 2012

UK Column Live - 18th October 2012 - YouTube

ponteporn

30-10-2012, 01:34 AM

Why was sheena Williams grandchildren taken into care in the first instance?

Where was the mum of the children?
Was she a danger to the children?
Where was the dad?
Was he not on the scene?

Social services are dodgy as fuck, but even so, they still need justification to take children. I just read 6pages of this and it seems to centre around his much directors get paid. I don't see the relevance, directors get nice money, it's a perk of the role. But I do feel half the story us missing? There must if been good reason for the Grand children to be taken in the first place?

ms hope

03-11-2012, 07:59 PM

Sheena only stood for election on the understanding she would get a chance to stand for county council and try to stop the abuse of children in care and forced adoptions by social services after witnessing the lack of support offered to families.

ms hope

03-11-2012, 08:00 PM

Final Charging Order hearing on 6th November 2012 - 10am

Maidstone County Court
The Law Courts
Barker Road
Maidstone
ME16 8EQ

Maidstone Borough Council have obtained a interim charging order against the property of former
Cllr Sheena Williams for non payment of council tax.

List the dates for all final charging order cases put before
District Judge Susan Sullivan for the last 3 months where the
applicant was Maidstone Borough Council for non payment of council
tax.

List how many final charging order cases District Judge Susan
Sullivan heard on 6th November 2012 where the applicant was
Maidstone Borough Council.

List how many final charging orders were adjourned on the 6th
November and the reason given by the judge for the adjournment and
the length of time of the adjournment period in days.

List on how many occasions this judge has adjourned a interim
charging order for Maidstone Borough Council instead of dismissing
it where evidenced facts provided by the Ministry of Justice has
confirmed that no liability orders had been granted by Maidstone
Magistrates Court because no council tax hearing had taken place on
that date. Link provided.

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/13...

Provide the law that states a judge can grant a council more time
when the council and magistrates court evidence contradicts the
facts presented on the day and therefore is not in favour of the
council being granted a final order.

Provide all recorded information that requires that a judge has to
follow the Banglore Principles Of Judicial Conduct within Maidstone
County Court and the Maidstone Magistrates Court.

“On page 6 of The Bangalore Principles Of Judicial Conduct 2002 it
states that “ensuring equality of treatment to all before the
courts is essential to the due performance of the judicial office”.
That is the principle of equality.

Both Maidstone Borough Council and Maidstone Magistrates Court have
repeatedly been asked by former Maidstone Borough Councillor Sheena
Williams to provide full disclosure of all information relating to
the council issuing summons and unsealed not court stamped
liability orders and both have refused to do so, along with
Maidstone County Court who are accepting these liability orders as
evidence to issue a Interim Charging Order on her home. The Final
Charging Order hearing on the 6 November 2012 attended by public
servant observers as well as court security staff who were
disrespectful of the public servant observers present, was
adjourned without her consent, to allow the council & courts more
time to cover their backs and get their story straight, as the
evidence supplied prior to the hearing provided by the Ministry of
Justice, contradicted both the council and the magistrates courts.

The receptionist/clerk refused to identify herself and had to be
repeatedly corrected when she kept referring to Ms Williams instead
of Sheena Williams, which she ignored. She initially said that no
other person was allowed into the hearing, then re-checked with the
judge that only one other person would be allowed in, when this was
also rejected the judge said that no one was allowed in as the
people present had not been through security. When this mistake was
pointed out, the judge then met privately with the council’s agent
prior to the hearing (who refused to give her full name or business
card to confirm her identity) and for whom the judge later spoke on
her behalf in court. It was clear to the public servant observers
that an adjournment had been arranged prior to the hearing via the
private meeting of the judge and the council’s agent.

The judge made it clear that sometimes the liability orders are
stamped by the Magistrates Court and sometimes not, she agreed that
the claim number on the County Court Interim Charging Order should
not be the same as the Magistrates Court claim number. She even
managed to read the illegible signature of someone who had signed
one of the liability orders although their judicial position was
not clearly defined and no council tax matters were heard at
Maidstone Magistrates Court on that day, as confirmed by the
Ministry of Justice nor was she concerned that a summons bore the
facsimile signature but not printed name of a Area Director Of
legal Services and that this is not a judicial position. She also
didn’t seem interested in the fact that the magistrate’s court
would not confirm whether or not the second liability order that
had apparently been signed by a JP was in actual fact a magistrate.

All efforts to obtain full disclosure of the facts and to set aside
the liability orders were ignored by both courts and MBC.

Copies of the evidence file held by the county court (but not a
sealed county court order) were only sent out by the county court
when Sheena repeatedly telephoned both the magistrates and county
court, after being initially made aware by a land registry letter
that a interim charging order had been issued via a ex-parte
hearing.

MBC chief executive sent a letter of conflation prior to the
hearing refusing to correspond further and conjoined two separate
issues, i.e. Council Tax / Building Services the latter who have
refused to provide proof that they have in fact revoked their
decision “deposited plans are of no effect” which is proven to be
in error after they received documented evidence and acknowledged
notification that work had been commenced prior to a expiry date
having been reached. May be its is just a coincidence that an
application for a interim charging order was filed on 21st August
2012 by MBC agents after she telephoned to complain on 13th August
that resulted in a visit from the building inspector on 14th to
correct their mistake ?

MBC have thereby effectively stopped Sheena from building her
extension to house her 4 granddaughters who Kent County Council
kidnapped for forced adoption in 2008, after she only agreed to
stand for election in order to raise serious concerns surrounding
children and children’s services. This was another reason why MBC
were asked to provide details of information shared between Kent
Police and the courts after her partner was stopped for delivering
the UK Column newspaper to MBC & KCC council offices by Kent Police
who said it could have been ‘terrorist related’.

A county court stamped ‘general form of judgment or order’ dated 13
November 2012 sent out by second class post contains no mention of
the final hearing date of the 6 November 2012 and does not state
any reasons for the adjournment. The adjournment date is 21
February 2013 at 10am Maidstone County Court and is far in excess
of 56 days mentioned by the judge at the ‘hearing’. The order has
not been signed by the judge nor is her name printed on the bottom
of the order.

It is quite clear to all who have witnessed and seen the evidence
that a collective of secret societies (Masonic & quasi-masonic)
hidden within public services are operating beyond their authority
and allowing individuals to be targeted.

My questions as a matter of urgency are as follows:

1. Under what lawful authority does District Judge Susan Sullivan
have the judicial right to hold a private meeting with MBC agent Ms
Shipley from JE Baring & Co Solicitors prior to a court
hearing-taking place.

2. Under what lawful authority does District Judge Susan Sullivan
have the judicial right to speak on behalf of Ms Shipley at the
hearing.

3. Under what lawful authority does District Judge Susan Sullivan
have the judicial right to decide that it is lawful to except both
sealed court stamped magistrates court liability orders and non
court stamped sealed magistrates court liability orders as
evidence.

4. Confirm whether or not Russell Lite as suggested by District
Judge Susan Sullivan is in fact a JP/Magistrate or state what other
judicial position he held at the time of signing as no printed name
or title is listed on the liability order of 12 July 2011 or state
the name of any other person with judicial standing who signed.

5. Confirm whether of not Carole Finlay is in fact a JP/Magistrate
whose signature but not printed name appears on liability order of
10 July 2012 or state what other judicial position she held at the
time of signing.

6. Under what lawful authority does District Judge Edwina Millward
have the judicial right to accept unsealed non-court stamped
magistrate’s court liability orders as evidence to issue an interim
charging order.

7. Under what lawful authority the county court receptionist/clerk
(who did not attend the hearing) have the right to refuse to
identify her position or give her name.

8. Under what lawful authority Malcolm Dodds acting as Director of
legal services has the judicial right to have his facsimile
signature printed onto summons.

9. Under what lawful authority both District Judge Edwina Millward
and District Judge Susan Sullivan have the judicial right to accept
a claim from MBC that bears the exact same claim number listed for
both Maidstone Magistrates Court and Maidstone County Court.

10. Under what lawful authority District Judge Susan Sullivan who
adjourned the hearing without consent can issue a order without
stating the date of the hearing it relates to and without giving
any reason for the adjournment.

11. Under what lawful authority District Judge Susan Sullivan and
District Judge Edwina Millward can issue orders without a judge’s
signature and printed name and title appearing on the bottom of the
order.

12. Under what authority can a judge authorise court orders to be
sent out by second-class post.

13. Under what authority can a judge ignore a motion to quash in
favour of a pre-arranged private decision made between the council
and the judge.

14. Under what authority can a judge ignore evidence provided from
the Ministry of Justice and adjourn a final charging order hearing
in favour of the council.

15. Under what rule of law can a final charging order hearing be
adjourned and not made final.

16. Under what lawful authority a judge can decide that documented
attempts to settle a claim prior to a hearing are not considered
lawful documents.

17. Provide the law that confirms that individual and not corporate
rights are protected in what amounts to a private ‘bar guild’
pre-meeting and not a court of law.

18. Provide the law that confirms that a fair hearing can take
place without equality of arms and full disclosure of the facts and
procedures being provided by the courts and the council who are
refusing to send documentation relating to a claim.

19. Confirm that a hearing can take place without the court
insignia being in the court, which amounts to a private bar guild
hearing.

20. Confirm that a judge who has stated that they are operating
under their oath of office to Queen Elizabeth the Second can sit in
judgment without the insignia being present in court.

All of the above questions via FOIA require all recorded
information and the precise section of the law upon which the
public servants rely in carrying out their judicial duty
encompassing all judicial proceeding and rules that they are
required to follow by law.

Councils have given pay-offs of £100,000 or more to 135 officials leaving their jobs in the past year, The Telegraph has found.

The pay-offs to the 135 officials followed several lucrative awards to council bosses the previous year. Analysis of local authority accounts found that 10 executives received pay-offs of almost £3 million between them, on top of their salaries and pension contributions.

The biggest were made by Kent county council where, in the past two years, five officials were given a total of £1.2 million. :eek:

Katherine Kerswell, the council's former managing director, received a £420,000 pay-off after less than 20 months in the job, on top of her £139,806 salary and £29,359 pension contribution. She is now the Cabinet Office's director of civil service reform on a salary of £142,000 a year.

Lynda McMullan, the former corporate director, was paid £172,000 in compensation and has since joined the National Audit Office as assistant auditor general. Mrs McMullan, who now earns £145,000, said after her appointment that "value for money" was one of the most important issues facing the public sector. :rolleyes:

The accounts also disclose that Peter Gilroy, the chief executive before Mrs Kerswell was appointed, was given £407,851 in compensation. He has since formed his own consultancy.

Paul Carter, the leader of Kent council, said the authority had no choice but to make the payments after taking legal advice. He urged the Government to change employment regulations to make it less expensive to sack people.

If they left of their own accord, had they fulfilled their contractual obligations ?

If they left of their own accord, was it prior to the expiry of their contract ?

If they left of their own accord, were they in breach of their contract ?

...or were they simply paid off and gagged ?

Kent County Council no longer has a CEO.

It took Sheena over 6 months to get an appointment with Paul Carter and even then she had to go through the Conservative Headquarters before he ‘managed’ to see her about her complaints about Kent’s ' childrens service ' kidnapping her granddaughters.

This appointment was conveniently made the day before the appeal deadline.

Some of you may remember that Sheena was in court on the 6th November in a battle to keep her home, as Maidstone Council have obtained an interim charging order against the property of former Cllr Sheena Williams for non payment of council tax.

A few KFM members and others were present and witnessed the so-called judiciary working for the local authority. :rolleyes:

The so called judge did a wonderful job of defending the council's agent and ignoring the. facts.

The hearing was adjourned and the new date is 21st February 10am at Maidstone County Court

If you can make it to Maidstone on this day it would be much appreciated.

As you can imagine this is a very worrying time and much support is both needed and welcome.

Some of you may remember that Sheena was in court on the 6th November in a battle to keep her home, as Maidstone Council have obtained an interim charging order against the property of former Cllr Sheena Williams for non payment of council tax.

A few KFM members and others were present and witnessed the so-called judiciary working for the local authority. :rolleyes:

The so called judge did a wonderful job of defending the council's agent and ignoring the. facts.

The hearing was adjourned and the new date is 21st February 10am at Maidstone County Court

If you can make it to Maidstone on this day it would be much appreciated.

As you can imagine this is a very worrying time and much support is both needed and welcome.

Please can you tell me under the FOIA how many complaints you have
received in connection with Kent Courts and public servants
operating within them.

How many complaints have you received after Kent Police have failed
to act.

And also supply the Metropolitan Police contact address for
complaints to be made in writing as I can not find an address.

‘On the 6th November 2012 I reported to a flat capped ranking Kent
Police Officer outside The Law Courts Barker Road Maidstone ME16
8RQ buildings that I had witnessed fraud in the court today
relating to Final Charging Order 10am hearing with regards to
Council Tax . That several Public Servants Observers had been
refused lawful entry initially into the court and a private meeting
between the council’s representative and the District Judge Susan
Sullivan was held before we were allowed entry constituting an
obstruction to justice.

I have brought this matter to your attention as the Officer from
Kent Police went back into the building after I spoke to him but
later emerged and just walked straight past.’

I have reported to SRA that the council agent as defined by the
judge is not a solicitor. After the SRA have confirmed that Ms
Shipley is NOT a solicitor for J E Baring & Co Solicitors 63 – 66
Hatton Gardens London operating for Maidstone Borough Council.

This is both a complaint and a FOI request.

Yours faithfully,

ivanataylor

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/fraud_in_the_courts

ms hope

19-03-2013, 03:17 AM

Why do CP and the Tavistock always seem to pop up around children ? :rolleyes:

Bore Place in Kent.

We work closely with schools, social services, mental health services, YOS, families and networks supporting young people attending Grow2Grow.

Grow2Grow is managed by a Consultant Clinical Psychologist with 20 years' experience working with people with mental health problems in the NHS and in fostering and adoption services.

The team includes an Occupational Therapist Gardener and Horticultural Therapist with extensive experience with young people. We also have trainees and volunteers from clinical training courses such as Salomons Clinical Psychology Training and from courses at the Tavistock & Portman NHS Foundation Trust.

Alicia was a member of a parliamentary Adoption Forum, advising on the development of the Adoption & Children Act 2002, and has subsequently lectured widely on the Act and its implementation to Cafcass officers and solicitors.

Alicia Collinson

Alicia Collinson was educated at St. Hugh’s College, Oxford, obtaining M.A. and M Phil degrees, and is a Harmsworth Scholar. She is the wife of Damian Green MP, Conservative MP for Ashford
…
I’ll leave you draw your own conclusions, but would note that amongst the ‘guests’ we have Matthew d’Ancona and Antonia Feuchtwanger, both of who have worked extensively, in the past (and at present in d’Ancona’s case) for titles in the Daily Telegraph group - the same newspaper that has taken the greatest interest in Paul/Guido’s ‘Smith Institute’ ’stories…
Much more important than Policy Exchanges ‘guest authors’, or those for whom it has hosteds event, which include:
George Osbourne MP
Michael Gove MP
William Hague MP (his first major speech as Shadow Foriegn Secretary, no less), and
Dr Irwin Stelzer (not an MP but columnist for the Sunday Times, senior fellow of the Hudson Institute and, most recently, editor of ‘Neoconservatism’. Policy Exchange hosted a breakfast event at which Stelzer reviewed US monetary policy and the outlook for the world economy, to be followed by a round-table discussion with a small group of senior policy-makers and corporate leaders. all sounds rather similar to one of the Smith Institute meetings that Paul/Guido is trying to sell as being a bit ‘dodgy’.
Much more important even that the ringing endorsement to their work to be found on their website’s home page:
“Under the brilliant guidance of Nicholas Boles, Policy Exchange has become one of the seminal influences on political debate in Britain.”
Rt Hon Oliver Letwin MP
In fact more important than anything else, is the matter of the Policy Exchange’s Charity Trustees; the people who a legally in control of and responsbile for the organisation as a whole…
…and, again, the line-up turns out to be very interesting indeed.

Alicia was a member of a parliamentary Adoption Forum, advising on the development of the Adoption & Children Act 2002, and has subsequently lectured widely on the Act and its implementation to Cafcass officers and solicitors.

Alicia Collinson

Alicia Collinson was educated at St. Hugh’s College, Oxford, obtaining M.A. and M Phil degrees, and is a Harmsworth Scholar. She is the wife of Damian Green MP, Conservative MP for Ashford
…
I’ll leave you draw your own conclusions, but would note that amongst the ‘guests’ we have Matthew d’Ancona and Antonia Feuchtwanger, both of who have worked extensively, in the past (and at present in d’Ancona’s case) for titles in the Daily Telegraph group - the same newspaper that has taken the greatest interest in Paul/Guido’s ‘Smith Institute’ ’stories…
Much more important than Policy Exchanges ‘guest authors’, or those for whom it has hosteds event, which include:
George Osbourne MP
Michael Gove MP
William Hague MP (his first major speech as Shadow Foriegn Secretary, no less), and
Dr Irwin Stelzer (not an MP but columnist for the Sunday Times, senior fellow of the Hudson Institute and, most recently, editor of ‘Neoconservatism’. Policy Exchange hosted a breakfast event at which Stelzer reviewed US monetary policy and the outlook for the world economy, to be followed by a round-table discussion with a small group of senior policy-makers and corporate leaders. all sounds rather similar to one of the Smith Institute meetings that Paul/Guido is trying to sell as being a bit ‘dodgy’.
Much more important even that the ringing endorsement to their work to be found on their website’s home page:
“Under the brilliant guidance of Nicholas Boles, Policy Exchange has become one of the seminal influences on political debate in Britain.”
Rt Hon Oliver Letwin MP
In fact more important than anything else, is the matter of the Policy Exchange’s Charity Trustees; the people who a legally in control of and responsbile for the organisation as a whole…
…and, again, the line-up turns out to be very interesting indeed.

As many as five of the new Cabinet graduated from Magdalen:
William Hague (Foreign Secretary), George Osborne (Chancellor), Chris Huhne (Energy and Climate Change), Dominic Grieve (Attorney General) and Jeremy Hunt (Culture, Olympics, Media and Sport).

For further information please see the attached article.

We congratulate them and wish them well in their very important new positions.:rolleyes:

Furthermore, John Hemming (Lib Dem MP, Birmingham Yardley) and John Redwood (Conservative MP, Wokingham) were both re-elected, and Nick Boles has been elected the new Conservative MP for Grantham and Stamford.
In addition, Eddie O'Hara, Siôn Simon and John Hutton (recently Secretary of State for Defence) all retired at the 2010 Election after highly distinguished service as Labour MPs.

Roger Gough is a Research Director of Policy Exchange. After reading PPE at Magdalen College, Oxford, he worked as an international investment analyst for fifteen years. He lived in Japan from 1988 to 1991 and later specialised in the European banking industry. At the 1997 General Election he stood as Conservative candidate for Dulwich and West Norwood. He is currently an elected member of Kent County Council, and serves as Cabinet Member for Regeneration and Supporting Independence.

http://www.ministryoftruth.org.uk/category/special-investigation/ ;)

Kent Councillor Roger Gough at NCAS 1 – Childrens Centres :rolleyes:

Councillor Roger Gough at NCAS 1 - YouTube

ms hope

19-03-2013, 08:19 PM

Mr Michael Gove - Adopted

Michael Andrew Gove (born August 26, 1967, Edinburgh) is a British politician, journalist and author. He has been the Conservative MP for Surrey Heath since 2005.

Michael joined The Times in 1996 as a leader writer and has been comment editor, news editor, Saturday editor and assistant editor. He has also written a weekly column on politics and current affairs in the newspaper and contributed to the Times Literary Supplement, Prospect magazine and The Spectator. He has written a sympathetic biography of Michael Portillo MP and a critical study of the Northern Ireland peace process, The Price of Peace, for which he won the Charles Douglas-Home Prize.

Michael joined the Conservative party at university and was secretary of Aberdeen South Young Conservatives. He has helped write speeches for a variety of cabinet and shadow cabinet ministers, including Peter Lilley and Michael Howard.

Michael was previously chairman of Policy Exchange, a centre-right think tank launched in 2002. As Conservative candidate in the safe seat of Surrey Heath, he entered Parliament in the 2005 election.

http://www.ministryoftruth.org.uk/category/special-investigation/ ;)

Two years later, in July 2007, he was made shadow secretary of state for children, schools, and families.:rolleyes:

Adoption, as I know, is a great opportunity if there are two willing parents. Married and committed gay couples who want to adopt should be given the chance to do so. It's far better to have a child brought up by two people who have made a commitment to each other.' :rolleyes:

'I was born in Edinburgh. I was four months old when I was adopted,' says Gove. 'I don't know if I was taken from my birth mother at a relatively early age and placed in the hands of carers. All I know is the process of finding and matching me with Mum and Dad was four months.'

Is this one of the reasons former Maidstone Borough Cllr Sheena Williams 4 granddaughters where kidnapped by the state, because they come from a RH Negative blood group family ?

Watch from 19.20 where Sarah talks about the state being far more interested in Rh Negative children :eek:

Research needs to be carried out as to why so many are being targeted and stolen by the state...what are this children being used for ?

Ammach Spring Conf 2013 CHild EXperiencers

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VCFlgXsItQY

That is unsettling: I cannot view the video. YT says, sorry about that, this video is unavailable.

Alternatively, I will do a search for Ammach Spring Conf 2013 CHild EXperiencers.

This is troubling: " Sarah talks about the state being far more interested in Rh Negative children".
Now, why is that, I wonder??

ms hope

02-07-2013, 12:35 AM

Run for the hills if you have children :eek:

March 2012

THE FUTURE OF MEDIATION IN KENT

Our first anniversary in this building has now passed and what exciting times we all continue to live in!

Our last newsletter in August shared details of how interest in mediation has been growing in Kent and the success we have all shared in improving the lives of families through the Parenting Information Programme.

Mediation has now become a positive and active part of the judicial response to Family Matters in the courts.

This has been aided by the solicitors’ growing enthusiasm for encouraging mediation, as well as the Family Court Judges and the Magistrates’ Family Panels directing parties to the Parenting Information Programmes.

The growing interest in our work has been evidenced by the invitations we have received from bodies who wish to increase their knowledge and awareness of our activities.

27 September: At the Royal Courts of Justice

The Family Mediators Association invited Joan, as a member of national organisation, to speak about the visions we have for the long term development of mediation. This focused upon the need for mediation to be more pro active, looking to assist families to avoid legal action by seeking information about the inadvertent consequences of their actions, prior to cohabiting, marrying or remarrying. This presentation acknowledged the importance of those who are able to assist all family members in the preparation for these major events; not only lawyers and mediators but will writers and those who facilitate the arrangement of wedding ceremonies.

There was particular interest in the problems which can ensue following remarriage and the possible negative affects this may have upon children and step children.

18 October

Nadia Beckett of Beckett Solicitors, and the local branch of the Law Society invited Mark and Joan to speak to their invited guests about our work. We were delighted to provide a Power Point presentation about the process of mediation and an in depth explanation of the facilitation of the PIPs workshops. The Chambers were given copies of the slides so that they could circulate these among those who were unable to attend and, for those who did, to be able to cascade information to their fellow practitioners.

4 November: Family Justice Council, Maidstone

We were delighted to receive an invitation from His Hon Judge Polden Designated Family Judge for Kent to take part in a session of the Annual Conference of the Kent Family Justice Council aimed at emphasising the role of mediation in settling disputes between parents over children.

This was most fortuitous timing, as Cafcass had just invited KFMS to become one of country’s two providers of the PIPs PLUS programme. Mike Coote, Head of Commissioning at Cafcass and Joan jointly addressed the Council on the proposed development, its purpose and application.

This PLUS element is intended to bring about an increase in the uptake of mediation.

Early experience of the earlier version of the PIP has been that whilst participants said that they found the programme helpful and informative, very few had then decided to move away from the Court in order resolve their differences.

The new initiative provides an additional element to the PIP in which the Court is able to order attendance at the PIP workshop and the attendance at a mediation information meeting. Cafcass are hopeful that this will result in more couples opting for mediation.

This is a pilot study which is being monitored by Liz Trinder of Exeter University. The results we obtain will help to inform the governments thinking on the future of mediation nationally.

Joan’s presentation was followed by a role play led by District Judge Green aimed at highlighting the role of the Court in promoting the early identification by the Court of the issues in dispute between parties to private law proceedings and an early examination of whether those issues could be resolved through mediation, whether Court based or via such organisations as KFMS. District Judge Green emphasised the importance in appropriate cases of a referral for a PIPs Plus course at the earliest possible time.

The list below shows the number of referrals received from each County/Magistrates Court and we would like to thank all the Judges, Magistrates and other court workers for their continued support in promoting the PIPs Plus initiative.

Malcolm Dodds, Clerk to the Justices of Kent, received an email from a solicitor quoting positive feedback from an attendee of a PIPs workshop. It read:

“Mr *** was an applicant father in my court today and he had attended a PIP with KFMS and he was thoroughly impressed with the programme. He said that it was really helpful to speak with the other attendees about their experiences and learnt a lot from what the group leader had to say. Mr *** said that he now appreciated the "appearance" of communication and was grateful for the advice on how to deal with discussing contact and court procedures with his child.”

Mike Coote and Judge Murdoch have recently indicated that where a Court date has been set, the purpose of this meeting is as a review only and during this review hearing, a Judge will want to know how they got on in mediation.

No matter what their Solicitors say, that will be the purpose of the meeting and it is important that this is emphasised to the clients.

As a direct response to the Cafcass initiative, it was apparent that all family mediators in Kent should be able to offer mediation to those ordered onto the PIPs PLUS course.

As a consequence KFMS hosted an information and training evening to which all local family mediators were invited. Following the presentation and information the mediators were invited to be included in the list of mediators. We shall be providing this list for those who attend the PLUS element. In this way we hope that the participants will be able to choose their mediation provider and that the work will be spread more evenly throughout the mediation community.

Since creating this list, other mediation providers have indicated an interest in being included and we shall be organising another training event later in the year.

24 February

Dawn Harrison, Chairperson of the local branch of Resolutions, requested that Mark Bohan and Debbie Hillman provided an update on the development surrounding PIPs PLUS to their membership.

The East Kent Family Panel has requested an update on the PIPs PLUS programme on 21 June.

During the coming months we shall be offering meetings to our local Judges, solicitors and mediators, in order for them to receive the opportunity to obtain further information about the reaction and outcome of this new initiative.

Malcolm Dodds has arranged for these events to attract CPD which will be provided by the HRMCTS.

We are now providing approximately 14 workshops per month, and these have an average attendance of 9 people.

Our first PIPs PLUS meetings are about to happen, and we are hopeful that they will be successful.

Our preparation for this court ordered mediation is complete, and we shall naturally monitor its delivery and adjust to the needs of those attending.

In order to cope with the increasing demand for mediation we have increased the number of mediators and are delighted to have been joined by Martha Monday, Tom Lawson and Sarah Emanuel, who will all play an active part in both mediation and the PIPs programmes.

It is gratifying to see that Kent is leading the way and enjoying the challenges and the cooperation of the wider judicial community.

Donation (check out the websites donation button) :roll:

We were very grateful to receive a donation of £100 from the Bromley Law Society and would like to thank them for this kind appreciation of our service.

Future Challenges

Apart from those presented by the PIPs PLUS we are all aware of the possible removal of Legal Funding for the majority of Family Matters.

As a response to this we are hoping to work in closer partnership with referring solicitors and during the coming months will be inviting them to help us to explore alternative ways of working, for example, fixed price packages for our clients.

We believe that in times of hardship people may prefer to know exactly what their divorce costs will be.

It is our hope that we shall be able to provide a list of local solicitors who will be able to provide services of support during mediation and advice on the proposals reached by clients. In addition to this a clear summary of the Court costs will enable an informed choice should clients no longer receive Legal Funding.

In order to develop a more balanced overview of developments in family mediation in the Kent area, we hope that future newsletters will contain contributions from fellow family workers. Should you wish to provide an article, comment or letter we hope to be able to include it in the next newsletter.

Within the next few weeks we would have finalised the creation of our new website and would hope that you will visit us on http://www.kentfms.co.uk.

We would like to thank Judge Green for his contribution in overseeing part of the content of this newsletter.

Is Mr Malcolm Dodds also a director of this company :eek::rolleyes::rolleyes:

being also the Clerk to the Justices for Kent/ Area Director Of legal Services/Justices' Clerk etc :roll:

wouldn't this be a MASSIVE conflict of interests :eek::eek::eek::rolleyes:

ms hope

02-07-2013, 12:38 AM

Children and Young People Board members for 2012/13:
Paul Carter, Kent County Council
http://www.local.gov.uk/web/guest/child ... E-TEMPLATE

I suppose the Leader of Kent County Council (Conservative) Paul Carter's brother James Carter (solicitor)owning the building used by Kent Family Mediation Services could also be construed as a MASSIVE CONFLICT OF INTERESTS

'Is it not also true that Paul Carter's brother James Carter
re-presented the family, which was referred to in The Times
newspaper by Camilla Cavendish and Public Court Records at High
Court, where the Judge took the unusual step of naming the
authority. Is it not also true that Kent County Council childrens
social services department carries out these duties for Medway
(unitary authority)and instigated this case in the Medway Family
County Court.

Quote: British justice: a family ruined
Last autumn a small English congregation was rocked by the news
that two of its parishioners had fled abroad. A 56-year-old man had
helped his pregnant wife to flee from social workers, who had
already taken her son into care and were threatening to seize their
baby. Most people had no idea why. For the process that led this
couple to such a desperate act was entirely secret. The local
authority had warned the mother not to talk to her friends or even
her MP. The judge who heard the arguments from social services sat
in secret. The open-minded social workers who had initially been
assigned to sort out a custody battle between the woman and her
previous husband were replaced by others who seemed determined to
build a guilty case against her. That is how the secret State
operates. A monumental injustice has been perpetrated in this quiet
corner of England; our laws are being used to try to cover it up.

As this case was not that long ago it seems strange that none of
your childrens services legal team were aware of it? '

The same lady who asked former Cllr Sheena Williams to fill in a social services type referral form for families that Sheena had nominated for a free place on the council’s Hotfoot Play scheme , which she refused to do. When she asked Jacqueline who was an officer at Maidstone Borough Council why she wanted information on these families she was told that ‘ they might come from single parent backgrounds or have sexualised behaviour’

Of course everyone she raised this complaint with including the leader of the council and other councillors simply ignored her.:rolleyes:

How ironic that Sheena was a director on the YMCA, how many more common purpose graduates, are or have been directors ?

Jacqueline Bobb has been employed at MAIDSTONE YMCA since 19 January 2012 currently as a Director (ORGANISATIONAL DEVELOPMENT MENTOR).

Another Conservative Councillor speaking out lets hope if he has children they don't steal them .... it wont be the first-time :mad:

Councillor raises concerns with Slough social services

Published: 9 Aug 2013

A LEADING opposition councillor has accused social services of 'slapping him down' and dismissing his concerns about a series of sensitive cases involving children.

Cllr Wayne Strutton, deputy leader of the Conservative group, said he has been frustrated on numerous occasions by council officers' attitudes when he has tried to bring casework to their attention.

He said: "I have always found there is this attitude that I have no right to question their decisions. People that aren't them don't have a right to be heard.

"When I do bring things up that are of importance, I get slapped down by the professionals for getting into their area. Apparently people like us aren't allowed to have an opinion, and you get a lot of that within the social services."

A Slough Borough Council spokeswoman said: "Considering the job they do and the amount of confidential information they deal with, we think it is expected that social workers may be reticent around people outside their area of work."

An "adoption party" for 54 Kent children has enabled 14 of them to find potential parents.

The event was the first to be held by a local authority after a pilot ended in 2013, Kent County Council (KCC) said.

Councillor Jenny Whittle said: "It was difficult to find families for these children and their paper profiles were overlooked."

The day gave people a chance to meet children they might otherwise just see in a photograph or video.

Ms Whittle, KCC's cabinet member for children's services, said: "When the adoptive parents met them face-to-face, they made a connection and now the children have hopefully found the loving families they need."
'Opened my mind'

The day was run in partnership with charities Coram and the British Association of Adoption and Fostering (BAAF).

One adopter said: "You see a child on a piece of paper but when you meet that child you get a whole different picture of what the child's about.

"I was quite adamant I wanted a little girl but being here today there's sibling groups, little boys - it's opened my mind to a lot of other family dynamics."

Activity days, sometimes called adoption parties, were run in the UK for a time from the mid-1970s, but have been held in the USA for more than 30 years.

A KCC spokesman said the council was planning to hold more of the events.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-23956151

Are children being handed out like party bags ?

I wonder how Cllr Jenny Whittle would feel if it was her children.

Was she cherry picked for the job, a member of ex staff who got a personal reference from Paul Carter leader Kent County Council ?

'The Communities and Local Government minister made the comment in a recorded confrontation with constituent Teresa Cooper earlier this month. Ms Cooper was one of at least six women who say they were drugged as teenagers at the Kendall House care home, Kent, in the late 1970s and early 1980s, whose children now have genetic defects.'

Maybe it is only comfortable for Tory MP’s to speak out on the issue of whistle blowers who are not in their own back yards – haven’t heard Kent Tory Tracey Crouch MP speak out about whistle blower former Maidstone Cllr Sheena Williams in Kent.

‘Born in 1975, Tracey grew up and was educated in Kent. As the daughter of a social worker and insurance broker, Tracey left Kent to study Law at The University of Hull when after graduation she accidentally found herself working as a researcher to a Conservative MP rather than training to become a solicitor.’

http://www.traceycrouch.org/about-tracey

ms hope

21-01-2014, 02:48 PM

A message from a Former Maidstone Borough Cllr Sheena Williams who had her 4 grand-daughters mis-taken in 2008 by Kent County Council Children’s ‘Services’

My birthday gift to you Ruby my very Special Extraordinary Grand-Daughter on your 10th Birthday, is Knowledge.

The Law of Nature surrounds you; True Spirit, Morality, Moral Principles, Natural Rights all these and more belong to you…

Honesty, Grace, Conscience, is your right to relief against the oppressive rich and powerful wrong doer’s and those who turn the other cheek, who act in iniquity, instead of offering protection to the poor, weak and helpless.